UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE
STUDYING SUSTAINABILITY IN URBAN ENVIRONMENTS
by
Rachael E. Hurley
An Analytical Paper Submitted to the Urban Affairs & Public Policy Faculty
of the School of Urban Affairs and Public Policy in Partial Fulfillment
for the Degree of MA of Urban Affairs & Public Policy
Newark, Delaware
December 2009
STUDYING SUSTAINABILITY IN URBAN ENVIRONMENTS
by
Rachael E. Hurley
Approved:
_______________________________
Edward J. O‟Donnell, AICP
Policy Scientist & Instructor
Institute for Public Administration, School of Urban Affairs & Public Policy
Chairperson of Analytical Paper Committee
Approved:
________________________________
Anthony Middlebrooks, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, Leadership Program, School of Urban Affairs and Public
Policy
Member of Analytical Paper Committee
Approved:
_______________________________
Danilo Yanich, Ph.D.
Associate Professor and Director of Urban Affairs & Public Policy
2
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 5
Problem Statement/Research Question .......................................................................................................8
Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................................................................... 9
Table 1: Variations in the Definition of Sustainability and Its Derivative, Sustainable Development .10
Scott Campbell (1996) ..............................................................................................................................10
Image 1: Campbell's Sustainability (Planners) Triangle .......................................................................11
Philip Berke and Maria Manta Conroy (2000) .........................................................................................12
Kent E. Portney (2003) .............................................................................................................................15
Edward J. Jepson Jr. (2004) ......................................................................................................................17
Maria Manta Conroy (2006) .....................................................................................................................19
Carla Chifos (2007)...................................................................................................................................20
Devashree Saha and Robert G. Paterson (2008) .......................................................................................22
Choosing a Measurement Framework ......................................................................................................26
Table 2: Sustainability Index by Researcher.........................................................................................26
Table 2: Sustainability Index by Researcher (continued) .....................................................................27
Table 2: Sustainability Index by Researcher (continued) .....................................................................28
Methodology ........................................................................................................................................................... 30
Table 3: Measurement of Sustainability for Case Studies ....................................................................32
Case Studies ............................................................................................................................................................ 33
Case Study 1: Wilmington, DE .................................................................................................................33
Table 4: Sustainability Actions Outlined in Mayor Baker's Executive Order ......................................34
Table 5: Wilmington Delaware's Completed or Currently Active Initiatives .......................................36
Table 6: Future Climate Change Opportunities / Climate Change Strategies.......................................37
Case Study 2: Philadelphia, PA ................................................................................................................41
Table 7: Goals and Targets from Greenworks Philadelphia ................................................................42
Case Study 3: New York, NY ...................................................................................................................45
Table 8: PLANYC 2030: Goals ............................................................................................................46
Table 9: PLANYC 2030: Plan of Action ..............................................................................................47
Concluding Remarks ............................................................................................................................................. 51
Table 10: Sustainable Index Summary Whole City Analysis v. Sustainability Plan Analysis .............52
Future Research ........................................................................................................................................55
3
Appendix A: Case Study Analysis .................................................................................................................... 58
Table 11: Case Study Analysis of City Wide Policies, Programs, and Actions ...................................58
Table 12: Case Study Analysis of Sustainability Plan Policies, Programs, and Actions ......................59
Appendix B: Greenworks Philadelphia: Goals and Initiatives ................................................................. 60
Table 13: Greenworks Philadelphia Goals, Targets, Initiatives, and Actions .......................................60
Appendix C: PLANYC 2030: Goals and Initiatives.................................................................................... 65
Table 16: PLANYC 2030: Goals, Initiatives, and Implementation Actions .........................................65
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................................................ 72
4
Introduction
Sustainability has become one of the most prominent ideas of this decade (Saha and
Paterson, 2008; Saha, 2009) and while the concept of sustainability has been subjected to
greenwashing, defined as the “expressions of environmentalist concerns especially as a cover for
products, policies, or activities” (Merriam-Webster) by all sectors and diluted by the misuse of the
term, its ability to capture the attention and intrigue of millions of people cannot be denied. It has
become the focus of the private sector, in terms of marketing and finding ways to save money,
and the media outlets which are perpetuating the popularity of the word with articles encouraging
people to improve their lives and the world through sustainable actions. The world is in crisis; the
world economies are in a recession, the earth is becoming even more unpredictable due to climate
change, more and more of the US population is tipping the scale at morbidly obese, and our way
of life is being threatened by the looming depletion of the world‟s oil and other non-renewable
energy reserves. Something has got to give and while no one is certain what the future holds, one
thing is for sure; there is no quick fix. However, some researchers, political leaders, and
communities are turning to the concept sustainability to help address current problems and begin
to integrate sustainability into their research, governments and lives to create the fundamental
change needed to survive the inevitable challenges the world will face in upcoming years.
Environmental sustainability is often what people think when they hear the term
sustainability but in reality it is a multifaceted word because it reaches beyond environmental
impacts and into the social and economic impacts of actions as well. (Saha and Paterson, 2008)
Understanding how these three concepts of sustainability are interrelated and their need for
balance is key to achieving a sustainable world. Actually achieving a true balance in
sustainability is highly unlikely due to the conflicting nature of environmental, social, and
5
economic sustainability, which is discussed later in this paper, but steps can be taken to mitigate
the negative effects of our current lifestyle and establish the groundwork for a more balanced way
of life that is less taxing on our governments, resources, businesses, society, environment.
Based on the number of research studies being conducted, the establishment Sustainability
Offices in governments around the country, and the number of cities publishing sustainability
plans, the importance of sustainability seems to be a growing idea among planning researchers,
practitioners, and government officials. (Saha, 2009) The built environment (ie. streets, buildings,
parks, cities, etc.) plays such an integral part in guiding people‟s behaviors through its rippling
influence in almost every other aspect of our lives from how we travel to where we live. In
addition, the environmental impacts of the built environment cannot be ignored. The planning
field lends itself perfectly to the idea of sustainability because of a planner's role in creating an
overall vision for a community and the physical places in which the community resides. Through
the use of comprehensive plans, policies, and initiative, Planners help jurisdictions plan for short
and long term development. This often includes taking an overarching look at issues and aspects
of the community to determine the best method for meeting their future needs. Because the
Planner examines all of a community‟s needs, they have a unique opportunity to see where a
community can integrate sustainable practices and facilitate communications between
departments so resources are used effectively and a balance is achieved. Municipalities all over
the country are integrating sustainability in their comprehensive plans and even creating Offices
of Sustainability and sustainability plans. (Saha, 2009) Several researchers in the planning field
have studied the connection between planning, government initiatives, and sustainability and have
developed methods for evaluating how successful communities are at integrating the concept of
sustainability. (Berke&Conroy,2000; Portney, 2003; Jepson, 2004; Conroy, 2006; Saha and
6
Paterson, 2008) Their research methods will be discussed below.
7
Problem Statement/Research Question
Through this paper, the current literature will be examined to answer (1) how are
researchers identifying and indexing municipalities‟ sustainability efforts? And (2) What
sustainability practices are being taken in three cities in the US and, based on the chosen index,
are they successful and are they balancing the “Three Es” of sustainability? The different
sustainability indices will be compared and analyzed. One index will be chosen and used for the
three case studies in which Wilmington (DE), Philadelphia (PA), and New York (NY) will be
examined to determine the level and balance of sustainability in each city.
8
Theoretical Framework
Sustainable development is a topic that has piqued the interest of researchers for over 30
years. (Wheeler, 2000) Even within the United States, where acceptance towards the idea of
sustainability has been slow to take hold, researchers have been exploring the topic and, more
specifically, what role planners, municipalities, and government officials are and should be
playing in promoting the ideas of sustainability within an urban environment. The purpose of the
following section is to examine the current literature for indices of sustainability within a
governmental context. How researchers have indexed the sustainability efforts, actions, and
policies of municipalities will be complied, summarized, and to a brief extent, analyzed.
The United Nation‟s World Commission on Environment and Development published a
report titled, Our Common Future, in 1987. (WCED) This report put forth a definition of
sustainable development that has provided a common base for researchers to begin their studies
into the topic. The report defined sustainable development as:
"meet present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their
needs"(WECD, 1987).
This is a vague definition that has led to a large amount of debate about its exact meaning
however there is an understanding and agreement about the underlying concepts of sustainability
provided by that definition. (Wheeler, 2000; Portney, 2003; Conroy, 2006; Saha, 2009) Many
researchers begin with the UN's definition, and the concepts it highlights, but create a new
definition they feel better suits the scope of their study while still maintaining the basic tenants of
sustainability. Table 1 provides a list of several researchers included in this paper and the
9
definition they have developed.
Table 1: Variations in the Definition of Sustainability and Its Derivative, Sustainable
Development
Definitions of Sustainable Development
United Nations World
Commission on
Environment and
Development (1987)
Sustainable development
is development that meets
the needs of the present
without compromising the
ability of future
generations to meet their
own needs.
Campbell (1996)
Sustainable Development:
"to move further towards
sustainable practices in an
evolutionary progression";
"to sustain, simultaneously
and in balance, these three
sometimes competing,
sometimes complimentary
systems."; "requires such
complex restructuring and
redistribution that the only
feasible path to global
sustainability is likely to be
a long, incremental
accumulation of local and
industry specific advances."
Berke and Manta
Conroy (2000)
Sustainable development is
a dynamic process in which
communities anticipate and
accommodate the needs of
current and future
generations in ways that
reproduce and balance local
social, economic, and
ecological systems, and link
local actions to global
concerns.
Saha and Paterson (2006)
"Movement towards
sustainability" is "changing
patterns of consumption and
production (that is… all the
ways we live, work, and play
at all levels of human activity-- institutions, firms,
households and individuals)
in a more ecologically
sensitive, economically
sound, and socially just
manner."
Sources: WCED (1987), Campbell (1996), Berke and Conroy (2000), Saha and Paterson (2006)
Scott Campbell (1996)
In 1996, Scott Campbell explored sustainable development and the conflicts that arise
between the three main principles of sustainability. He recognized three parts to sustainability;
environment, equity, and economy or the “Three Es”. These three concepts comprise the
sustainability triangle (Image 1). True sustainability can only be achieved where there is a
balance between the “Three Es” however, in reality, ever achieving a balance is unlikely.
(Campbell, 1996, p.297) This is because if one E is supported, it often means the detriment to
one or both of the other Es. He defines these conflicts as the property, resources, and
development conflicts. (Campbell, 1996, p.298-299) Campbell argues the role of the planner then
becomes one of mediation between the competing aspects of sustainability and to find ways for
the “Three Es” to support rather than work against each other. (Campbell, 1996, p.305) This
10
article set forth a basic guideline for defining sustainability efforts within the planning realm.
Using Campbell‟s triangle to measure how well and to what extent urban areas are balancing
environment, equity, and economy in their efforts to promote sustainable development became
the focus of many follow-up studies.(e.g. Berke and Conroy, 2000; Chifos, 2007; Saha and
Paterson, 2008)
Image 1: Campbell's Sustainability (Planners) Triangle
Source: Campbell (1996)
It is important to recognize that sustainability efforts cannot take place in an isolated
environment. The very nature of sustainability requires coordination on a large scale. Small areas
(depending on the context can include neighborhoods, towns, cities, states) can develop individual
sustainability plans to address specific issues but they cannot discount what is happening around
them and what others, outside their borders, are doing and planning. This also means larger areas
11
(depending on the context can include cities, states, metropolitan regions, or the entire country)
developing sustainability plans can address large, regional concerns but they should include the
smaller places, within the area they are planning for, to best meet the needs of everyone involved.
Planning for sustainability on a larger, or more specifically, on a metropolitan scale, can prove to
be challenging due to the need for political and institutional will and cooperation. (Wheeler, 2000,
p.133) However, a city promoting sustainable development and good urban sustainability plan
will recognize that their impacts will reach well beyond their borders. The cities must also
understand social movements, nongovernmental organizations, regional institutions,
intergovernmental coordination, performance standards, participatory planning and consensus
building, and educational efforts will have important roles in helping achieve sustainability
efforts. (Wheeler, 2000, p.138-139) Knowing if a city understands these concepts is not enough
to determine if and to what extent a city is effectively promoting sustainability. A sustainability
index still needs to be developed and applied. The following researchers developed a series of
indices to gauge sustainability efforts among cities.
Philip Berke and Maria Manta Conroy (2000)
Berke and Conroy were the first researchers to develop an index to help understand local
government sustainability efforts. (Saha, 2009 p.25) They evaluated 30 comprehensive plans
based on a set of analytical criteria applied to each plan. Ultimately, their goal was to answer two
questions; "Are plans that use sustainable development as an organizational concept more likely
to promote sustainability principles then plans that do not?" and "Do plans achieve balance by
supporting all sustainability principles, or do plans narrowly promote some principles more than
others?" (Berke and Conroy, 2000, p. 21-22)
12
Their definition of sustainability specifically focuses on a balance of the “Three Es" and
looking beyond borders when examining the consequences of actions (Table 1). A set of six
sustainability principles, found in Table 2 on page 25, were identified and, using a content
analysis method, the plans were evaluated for how well the principles were promoted throughout.
In order to determine how well the principles were promoted, the policies set forth by the plan
were assigned the appropriate principle based on its goal. Then the development management
techniques promoted by those policies were identified and finally, the policies were given a score
of 1 or 2 based on if they were suggested or required, respectively.
After the evaluation was completed, Berke and Conroy concluded the explicit inclusion of
sustainable development ideas within a plan does not translate into an increase in the promotion
of the ideas. In answering their second question they found the evaluated plans lacked balance
and instead, the weight of the plans focused on creating better living environments for
constituents which Berke and Conroy defined as “The locations shape, density mix, proportion,
and quality of development should enhance fit between people and urban form by creating
physical spaces adapted to desired activities of inhabitants; encourage community cohesion by
fostering access among land uses; and support a sense of place to ensure protection of any special
physical characteristics of urban forms that support community identity and attachment.” (Berke
and Conroy, 2000, p. 23) They discovered a third finding; many of the plans do not venture
beyond traditional content and into areas that would promote sustainable development techniques.
The analysis used by Berke and Conroy is based on a standardized analytical technique in
which intercoder reliability was tested to ensure consistency among the analysis. However, with
this type of analysis, direct participation from municipalities is lacking and the coders are basing
13
their analysis off of what they know about the comprehensive plans and on an outsider's
perspective of the programs. This can lead to in incomplete analysis because the coders may not
have knowledge of all the municipality‟s actions and initiatives.
Berke and Conroy completed another study in 2004 to address two questions brought forth
from their 2000 study; "Does support for dimensions of the planning process and the integration
of sustainable development as an organizing concept in plans lead to greater support for the
principles of sustainable development in local plans?" and "Does the presence of a state planning
mandate lead to greater support for the principles of sustainable development in local plans?"
(Berke and Conroy, 2004, 1382) Using the analysis technique they developed in their 2000 study,
in addition to telephone surveys, they studied 115 communities. From their analysis they
concluded state mandated planning, increased public participation breadth, and positive
population changes increase the likelihood for a plan to incorporate sustainable development
ideals. Interestingly, they again found a disconnect between the integration of the concept of
sustainability into the plan and the actual planning for sustainable development taking place
within the towns. (Berke and Conroy, 2004, 1392-1393) From this study, three factors can be
derived as important when analyzing a city on its sustainability efforts. First, does the state
require a planning document, second, has the city taken efforts to incorporate and engage the
public, from multiple areas within its borders, in the planning process and third, is there a positive
population change. (Berke and Conroy, 2004, 1393-1394) Alone these three factors will not
identify a city‟s sustainability efforts because the inclusion and follow through individual
sustainability initiatives is not taken into account, but according to the study, the three factors
provide strong indicators that a city is incorporating sustainable development into their plans.
For the second study, Berke and Conroy again used the protocol developed in their
14
previous study and tested for intercoder reliability. (Berke and Conroy, 2004, 1398) However,
this type of analysis can be unintentionally influenced by the coder and their knowledge and
experience with the municipalities. To add another dimension to their research, Berke and
Conroy developed a survey with open ended and closed ended questions that they conducted
through a series of telephone interviews. This gave the researchers feedback directly from the
cities but a self selection bias occurs because the cities could choose whether or not to participate.
(Berke and Conroy, 2004, 1390)
Kent E. Portney (2003)
Kent E. Portney conducted a research study in hopes of gaining insight into what extent
cities in the United States are moving towards enacting sustainability initiatives within their
boundaries. He selected twenty-four cities with actual sustainability policies on the books as of
January 1, 2000 (Portney, 2003, p. 64). The twenty-four cities were analyzed against an index
Portney developed, called the “Taking Sustainable Cities Seriously” index, in order to measure
how serious cities are about sustainability. The criteria for his index can be found in Table 2.
The twenty-four cities were cross referenced with the thirty-four program elements found in
Portney‟s index. If the city had a program element it was indicated with a „Y‟. If the city did not
have one of the program elements, an „N‟ was indicated. The totals were tallied up and the scores
ranged from six to thirty. (Portney, 2003, p. 68-71)
Through his analysis, Portney was able to address some of his research questions. He was
interested in examining “what cities actually seem to be doing in their respective pursuit of
sustainability”, does the answer to that question support or refute the current theories of
sustainability, can cities be compared for serious sustainability attempts using the same set of
criteria, and “why do some cities seem, at least on the surface, to be taking sustainability more
15
seriously than others?” (Portney, 2003, p. 2-3) He stated the goal of this research project was “not
to assess whether cities have become more sustainable” (Portney, 2003, p. 31) so ultimately he is
not concerned with the actual outcome and success of a city‟s sustainability initiatives but rather
the effort a city is putting into creating sustainability initiatives. At the time of his research,
Portney felt the concept and adoption of sustainability efforts was too new and even if cities had
adopted policies, initiatives, and programs, the effects of those enactments would not be felt for
some time. After the analysis, a detailed profile of eight cities with strong and, based on
Portney‟s analysis, serious effort towards sustainable activities was completed to try and identify
a common element between the cities, however very little was found to be similar between these
eight cities at the time of his research.
Portney‟s index is one of the longer indices examined in this paper. It breaks key
programs and activities into seven sections which are (1)Sustainable Indicators project,
(2)“Smart Growth” activities, (3) land use planning programs, policies, and zoning, (4)
Transportation planning programs and policies, (5) Pollution prevention and reduction efforts,
(6) Energy and resource conservation/efficiency initiatives, and (7) Organizational/
administration/ management/ coordination/ governance. (Portney, 2003, p.65) Under these seven
sections, the thirty-four elements of the index are distributed. From there Portney completes his
simple „Y‟/‟N‟ analysis. Points are awarded on a one-to-one basis with a maximum score of
thirty-four. While his index is broken down into several sections, he feels environmental
sustainability plays an important role in the analyzing a city‟s sustainability efforts (Portney,
2003, p.240).
If examined for a balance between the “Three Es”, Portney‟s index contains twenty three
environmental protection initiatives, five economic development initiatives, and six social
16
justice/equity initiatives. (Saha and Paterson, 2008, p.24-26) His index allows for a simple
analysis to measure sustainability among municipalities. He did not distribute surveys do the
analysis was done by someone with an outsider‟s perspective. Their knowledge and
understanding of the city and its sustainability efforts is based on researching available materials.
The municipalities are not directly included in the analysis.
Edward J. Jepson Jr. (2004)
Another researcher, Edward J. Jepson, developed his own method for analyzing the extent
to which sustainable development techniques have been integrated into local planning and
development policies. Through his study he aimed to answer three questions: "(1) To what extent
are sustainable development policies being enacted in U.S. communities, and what is their
nature? (2) What are the principal impediments to the enactment of such policies? and (3) What
is the role of the planning office in their enactment?" (Jepson, 2004, p. 229)
Based on a literature search he developed a list of thirty-nine tools and techniques that
contribute to sustainable development practices within a community which can be found in Table
2. This list is meant to represent a "comprehensive collection of the current state of sustainable
development as it can be operationalized at the local level." (Jepson, 2004, p.231) From 390
cities, 103 returned the survey in which they were asked to answer three questions about to each
of the thirty nine tools or techniques. The questions are as follows:
"Question 1: "Has your community taken legislative or administrative action relative to
the achievement of this initiative, either on its own or in collaboration with another unit of
government?" The response choices were taken, not taken, and not permitted (state-enabling
legislation needed)."
"Question 2: "What in your view is the principal reason that direct legislative or
17
administrative action has not been taken relative to the achievement of the policy?" The response
choices were fiscal constraints, administrative limitations, opposition from community groups,
lack of knowledge/information, low public interest, and not appropriate or necessary in relation
to community goals and objectives."
"Question 3: "As a result of your experience and observation, what has been the nature of
involvement of the community's planning office relative to the action that was taken regarding the
policy?" The response choices were took and retained lead role from the beginning, became an
enthusiastic partner, contributed appropriately as requested and needed, and was minimally
involved."(Jepson, 2004, p. 231)
From the responses Jepson found it is “probably true that more than 80 percent of
communities have taken action on less than half of the sustainable development policies” (Jepson,
2004, p. 235) he identified. His lists of thirty nine sustainability initiatives provided
municipalities with a wide range of options to choose from. He was also interested in looking
beyond whether they simply have or do not have such an initiative and into whether the
community has taken action on the initiative and if not, why. The initiatives identified in his index
included twenty two environmental protection initiatives, twelve economic development
initiatives, and five social justice/equity initiatives. (Saha and Paterson, 2008, p.24-26) Measure
the balance of the “Three Es” of sustainability would be impossible using his index because it
does not attempt to provide an balanced selection of sustainability initiatives for municipalities to
choose from.
His analysis required the direct participation of municipalities and the responses are based
on the individual experiences of the respondent. This allows for people with direct experience and
knowledge of the municipality to answer the survey questions. There is a self-selection bias to
18
this type of survey and this should be taken into consideration when reviewing the findings
because communities actively participating in sustainability initiatives will be more likely to
return the survey. (Jepson, 2004, p. 235) The survey was accompanied by a letter instructing the
recipient to forward the survey to the most appropriate person if they did not feel they were
qualified to answer and they were asked to record their positional affiliation but ultimately the
role of the actual respondent is unknown. (Jepson, 2004, p. 231)
Maria Manta Conroy (2006)
Maria Manta Conroy completed her own study, published in 2006, to examine if the
concept of sustainability was present within the local governments in Indiana, Kentucky, and
Ohio. Conroy felt the previous studies focused primarily on cities known for taking the lead on
the concept of sustainability. (Conroy 2006, p.18) In order for sustainability to be accepted as a
mainstream concept and really take hold as a basis for planning, Middle America and the
everyday, indistinguishable city has to be committed to the idea of sustainability and integrating it
into the planning process. (Conroy, 2006, p.20) To study this, she selected all 975 communities
in Indiana, Kentucky, and Ohio with populations between 2,000 and one million with a publically
available mailing address. The towns were sent a survey comprised of both open ended and
multiple choice questions and 436 returned the survey. Within the surveys Conroy asked for the
respondents to identify how familiar they personally were with sustainability, whether it was a
useful concept when planning, if they felt the town or city had an understanding of the concept, if
sustainability was discussed in the government, if there were activities with sustainability goals,
and if the word „sustainability‟ was used in conjunction with those activities. (Conroy, 2006,
p.22-23) The answers were selected through multiple choice. These questions, while not of
specific activities taking place within the municipality offer some insight into why there might be
19
a disconnect between an explicit acknowledgment of sustainability as a goal and the promotion of
sustainability ideals. In particular, 70% of the respondents indicated their community has
planning-related activities promoting sustainability but 81% indicated sustainability is not
explicitly mentioned in conjunction with those activities. (Conroy, 2006, p.22) In addition to the
questions above, sixteen sustainability activities, derived from a review of the comprehensive
plans used in the 2000 Berke and Conroy study, were included in the survey with multiple choice
responses (Table 2). An open ended response section was included to provide respondents a
place to elaborate as needed. Overall, her surveys took into account the importance of additional
factors with the potential to influence the level of sustainability and initiatives within a city, such
as knowledge dissemination, rather than only focusing on what activities are being implemented.
The sixteen sustainability initiatives within her index include seven focusing on environmental
protection, five focusing on economic development, and four focusing on social justice/equity.
(Saha and Paterson, 2008, p.24-26)
The analysis method employed by Conroy for this study allowed the cities to directly
answer questions relating to them however, since the surveys were sent to individuals, their
experience may have an unwanted effect on the survey responses and the actual person
responding to the survey is unknown. (Conroy, 2006, p.20-21) Again, this type of mailed survey
can have a self-selecting bias and should be taken into consideration.
Carla Chifos (2007)
Local municipalities are not solely responsible for encouraging sustainable development
programs and initiatives. Carla Chifos, an assistant professor from the School of Planning at the
University of Cincinnati, examined three federal programs aimed at improving the United States
commitment to sustainable development after the 1992 United Nations' Conference for
20
Environment and Development. The index she uses, shown in Table 2, is derived from guidelines
set forth by the President's Council on Sustainable Development and was used to compare the
U.S. Department of Energy's Center for Excellence for Sustainable Development, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's Sustainable Development and Systems Preservation program,
and the U.S. Department of Transportation's Transportation, Community, Challenge
Grant. (Chifos, 2007, p.438) After more than twenty in-depth, guiding interviews with
government administrators, program directors, and federal employees as well as a literature search
and follow up interviews, (Chifos, 2007, p.436) Chifos assigned each guideline one of three
designations based on its inclusion in the programs; strong component, existing component, or
negligible or nonexistent component. The length of time the programs have been active, the
number of projects (assisted), the total amount of funding, and the award amounts were also
examined. (Chifos, 2007, p.438)
The index used by Chifos provide one section asking if the programs “balance social,
environmental, and economic concerns” but the guidelines do not offer any way to identify a
balance in the “Three Es”. This analysis method offers a simplified method that can be
transitioned from analyzing federal programs to city plans and programs promoting sustainability
efforts. Unlike the previous indices, Chifos takes into account how long the programs have been
active, the number of projects under each program, and the amount of funding for each program.
However, her index contains room for personal interpretation and judgment with items such as
"balance social, environmental, and economic concerns", and "improved quality of life for more
people". The ranking system she utilizes does not offer solid guidelines for how or what qualifies
under each term. Because of the personal interpretation involved, it is questionable whether, if
done again, the outcome of her study would be repeatable.
21
Devashree Saha and Robert G. Paterson (2008)
In 2006, there was still uncertainty as to what extent sustainability efforts are being
supported by local governments in the United States. (Saha and Paterson, 2008, p.21) Since the
study by Berke and Manta Conroy in 2000, the concept of sustainability has taken off in the eyes
of the public as concerns about global warming and climate change mount. The idea of climate
change has become common knowledge making it harder to deny and sustainability and
sustainable development has the potential to be one way to combat and mitigate the predicted
changes and devastation associated with climate change. Because land use and planning affects
many aspects of people's lives, such as where they live, how they build, how they travel from
place to place, and where their resources come from, (WCED, 1987) the need for a connection
between planning and sustainability has become even more apparent and urgent. The previous
studies indicated a disconnect between the idea of sustainability and the actual application of
sustainability. Researchers Saha and Paterson published a study in which they too developed an
index to analyze local government's efforts in promoting sustainable development in their
planning practices. They were particularly interested in how well local governments were
balancing the “Three Es”. The completed study aimed to answer the following four
questions:"(1) Are cities adopting sustainable development as an overarching development
framework or are they merely choosing sustainability policies in an ad hoc manner; (2) What
kind of sustainability initiatives are being adopted more frequently by local governments as
opposed to others; (3) are local governments making an equal effort to promote the environment,
economy, and equity dimensions (also referred to as the "Three Es") of sustainable development
or are some sustainability initiatives being pursued more vigorously than others; and (4) what
are the major obstacles to adopting and implementing sustainability initiatives?" (Saha and
22
Paterson, 21)
In order to improve upon the previous research done in the area of promoting sustainable
development through government policies and initiatives they completed a literature search and
complied a panel of fifty experts to select the most important sustainability initiatives. From their
research, Saha and Paterson identified sixty-six sustainability measures spread across the ideas of
environmental protection, economic development, and social justice/equity. They attempted
provide a balanced number of possible initiatives within each section by asking each expert
identify the five most important measures in each of the three categories. Out of the original
sixty-six initiatives, thirty-six were singled out by the experts and included as a sustainability
index for the study (Table 2). (Saha and Paterson, 2008, p.23)
With this information, Saha and Paterson developed and administered a survey to 353
cities, with 2000 populations over 75,000, in which they asked the cities about their current
efforts for promoting sustainability and as well as to indicate which of the thirty-six, expert
identified, initiatives they have adopted. The initiatives the cities adopted did not have to be
specifically within a sustainability plan and, instead, could be taking place in a variety of
departments within the city. (Saha and Paterson, 2008, p.26-27) 216 cities returned the surveys
and they found that "a sustainability plan, presence of a sustainability indicators project, and a
separate office of sustainability with a clear delineation of responsibilities and accountability"
(Saha and Paterson, 2008, p.28) are key indicators in determining the strength of a city‟s
commitment to sustainability. Saha and Paterson analyzed what sustainability measures the
cities had indicated as taking and found most of the measures were environmentally based, trailed
by economics and then social justice/equity. (Saha and Paterson, 2008, p.31) An important part of
Saha and Paterson's research was the opportunity for respondents to relay the barriers they have
23
come up against while trying to promote the “Three Es” and this was done through an open ended
portion of the surveys. (Saha and Paterson, 2008, p.30) This information may provide important
insight as research continues into why there seems to be a disconnect between integrating
sustainability as an ideal and the actual practice of sustainability.
Through a very thorough search of the literature and input from a panel of experts in
sustainability, Saha and Paterson developed a balanced set of thirty-six sustainability initiatives.
The analysis required direct participation of survey respondents through a simple survey in which
they could select one of three responses; Currently Adopted, Not Adopted, or N/A. (Saha and
Paterson, 2008, p.33) The multiple choice section consisting of the sustainability measures was
simple, specific, and straightforward, leaving little room for personal interpretation from the
respondents. An open ended section of the survey allowed for participants to provide answers to
questions based specifically on their experiences. The surveys were sent to city managers, the
planning director/community development director, or the office/coordinator of sustainability if
available however, the actual respondent is unknown. (Saha and Paterson, 2008, p.27) Saha and
Paterson acknowledge a self-selection bias with this type of survey and this should be taken into
consideration when reviewing the findings. (Saha and Paterson, 2008, p.27)
Sustainability is becoming an important concept within governments (Wheeler, 2000;
Conroy and Beatley, 2007; Saha and Paterson, 2008; Saha, 2009) and because sustainability deals
with the interconnection of many aspects of our communities and resources, understanding what
governments are doing in terms of promoting sustainability initiatives is essential. Our
governments have such an influential role in every aspect of our society that understanding the
connection between them and sustainability measures is important. This is particularly true today
as the United States is in the midst of a major economic recession. Resources are tight all around
24
and by encouraging sustainable measures it allows us to use those resources more efficiently and
serve more people then under an unsustainable system.
Measurement of a city‟s sustainability efforts proves to be a key issue that has garnered
the attention of many individuals and for good reason. Being able to statistically compare cities
and their policies proves to the general public, as well as the citizens living within the cities, that
the sustainability efforts are genuine. The cataloging of sustainability initiatives and efforts goes
a long way toward reassuring and proving to the people that sustainability is a serious issue and is
something of great importance. It also provides those who are interested in increasing
sustainability efforts within their city a place to start, ideas for initiatives that work, and proof to
present to gain support from community members, political officials, and other stakeholders. It
also provides them with validation that they are not alone in their cause. Measuring what cities
are doing will also help with a broader understanding as to why some cities are interested in
sustainability and other are still lagging behind. The actual documentation of sustainable
programs will not provide insight on its own but it may provide some data or a spring board to
further research on the subject.
25
Choosing a Measurement Framework
The measures of sustainability in the following table were taken from the above researcher's
literature. Due to the length of the sustainability indices and the number of researched included in
the analysis, Table 2 has been broken into three sections and can be found on this page as well as
the two following pages:
Table 2: Sustainability Index by Researcher
Campbell (1996)
Berke and Conroy (2000)
Balance Between
Principles (1)
Social
Environmental
Economic
Harmony with Nature
Livable Built Environments
Place-Based Economies
Equity
Polluters Pay
Responsible Regionalism
Development Management
Technique (2)
Land Use Regulation
Property Acquisition
Capital Facilities
Financial Incentives
Building Codes and Standards
Public Education and Awareness
Third
Suggested
Required
Sources: Campbell (1996), Berke and Conroy (2000), Portney (2003), Jepson (2004), Conroy (2006), Chifos (2007),
Saha and Paterson (2008)
26
Table 2: Sustainability Index by Researcher (continued)
Portney (2003)
Jepson (2004)
Sustainability Indicators Projects
Sustainable Development Policy Areas
Indicators projects active in last five years
Indicators progress report in last five years
Does indicators projects include "action plan" of
policies/programs?
Agricultural district provisions
Agricultural protection zoning
Bicycle access plan
Smart Growth Activities
Brownfield reclamation
Community indicators program
Community gardening
Cooperative housing
Eco-industrial park
Ecological footprint analysis
Environmental site design regulations
Green-building requirements
Green procurement
Green maps
Green print plans
Heat island analysis
Import substitution
Incentive/inclusionary zoning
Infill development
Life-cycle public construction
Living wage ordinance
Low-emission vehicles
Neo-traditional development (also known as traditional
neighborhood development and smart development)
Open space zoning
Pedestrian access plan
Purchase of development rights
Rehabilitation building codes
Right-to-farm legislation
Solar access protection regulations
Solid waste life-cycle management
Tax base/revenue sharing
Transfer of development rights
Transit-oriented-development
Transportation demand management
Urban growth boundary
Eco-industrial park development
Cluster or targeted economic development
Ecovilliage project or program
Brownfield redevelopment (project or pilot project)
Land use planning programs, policies, and zoning
Zoning use to delineate environmentally sensitive growth areas
Comprehensive land use plan that includes environmental issues
Tax incentives for environmentally friendly development
Transportation planning programs and policies
Operations of inner-city public transit (buses and/or trains)
Limits on downtown parking spaces
Car pool lanes (diamond lanes)
Alternatively fueled city vehicle program
Bicycle ridership program
Pollution Prevention and reduction efforts
Household solid waste recycling
Industrial recycling
Hazardous waste recycling
Air Pollution reduction program (i.e., VOC reduction)
Recycled product purchasing by city government
Superfund site remediation
Asbestos abatement programs
Lead paint abatement program
Energy and resource conservation/efficiency initiatives
Green building program
Renewable energy use by city government
Energy conservation efforts (other than Green building program)
Alternative energy offered to consumers (solar, wind, biogas, etc.)
Water conservation program
Organization/administration/management/coordination/
governance
Single governmental/nonprofit agency responsible for
implementing sustainability
Part of a city-wide comprehensive plan
Involvement of city/country/metropolitan council
Involvement of mayor or chief executive officer
Involvement of the business community (e.g., Chamber of
Commerce)
General public involvement in sustainable cities initiative (public
hearings, "visioning" process, neighborhood groups or
associations, etc.)
Urban forestry program
Urban ecosystem analysis
Wildlife habitat/green corridor planning
Wind energy development
Sources: Campbell (1996), Berke and Conroy (2000), Portney (2003), Jepson (2004), Conroy (2006), Chifos (2007),
Saha and Paterson (2008)
27
Table 2: Sustainability Index by Researcher (continued)
Conroy(2006)
Chifos (2007)
Sustainability Activities
Scale of Program
Recycling/waste minimization
Public participation
Local employment
Regional Coordination
Years
#Projects
Total Funding
Range of Awards
Conserving natural resources
Environmental constraints
Definition
Affordable housing, social equity
Mixed use/compact development
Pedestrian-oriented development
Brownfield reuse, infill
Green-building efforts
Recruiting green industries
Energy conservation
Dispute resolution
Polluters pay
Promote public transportation,
park&ride lots, carpooling
Saha and Paterson (2008)
Expert Identified Sustainability
Measures
Environmental Protection Activities
Water quality protection
Curbside recycling
Open space preservation
1. Balance social, environmental, and
economic concerns
2. Participation in planning and
decision making
3. Improved quality of life over time
4. Improved quality of life for more
people
Policy Theme
1. Enhance learning
2. leverage markets and financial
sources
3. Build local capacity
4. Build partnerships
Environmentally sensitive area protection
Operation of inner-city public transit
Environmental education programs
Environmental site design regulations
Energy conservation efforts (other than green
building program)
Transportation demand management
Ecological footprint analysis
Alternative energy offered to customers
Strategic Opportunity Area
Green procurement
Green building
Renewable energy use by city government
1. Green Infrastructure
Economic Development Activities
2. Appropriate land use
3. Revitalization
4. Strengthen rural economies
5. Conserve resources
Infill development
Business retention program
Cluster/targeted economic development
Brownfield reclamation
Empowerment/enterprise zones
Local business incubator program
Tax incentives for environmentally friendly
development
Eco-industrial park development
Purchase of development rights/Transfer of
development rights
Agricultural protection zoning
Urban growth boundary/urban service boundary
Rank above as:
Strong Component
Existing Component
Negligible or nonexistent component
Equity Activities
Neighborhood planning
Youth opportunities and antigang program
Affordable housing provisions
Homeless prevention and intervention
Sustainable food systems or food security
program
Living wage ordinance
Day care service for service sector and lowincome employees
Job-housing balance
Mass transit access with local income subsidies
Women and minority owned business and
investment programs
Incentive/Inclusionary zoning
Sources: Campbell (1996), Berke and Conroy (2000), Portney (2003), Jepson (2004), Conroy (2006), Chifos (2007),
Saha and Paterson (2008)
28
In Table 2 I have compiled all of the initiatives, policies, actions and criteria the
researchers have used to determine what they define as representing sustainability. The indices
range from simple evaluations such as Campbell's balance of environmental, social, and economic
sustainability to more complex models provided by Berke and Conroy, and Saha and Patterson.
The specific questions asked by each researcher were taken into consideration because the cities
studied in each case study will not be contacted for comment. The index developed by Saha and
Paterson will be used to analyze Wilmington(DE), Philadelphia(PA), and New York(NY).
Through the analysis, the second research question, What sustainability practices are being taken
in three cities in the US and, based on the index, are they successful and are they balancing the
“Three Es” of sustainability?, can be answered.
Saha and Paterson have gone to great length to ensure their thirty-six expert identified
sustainability measures represent a balanced view of environmental, social, and economic
activities. While there are many sustainability measures left off of this list, thirty were eliminated
by the panel of experts, and new sustainability activities are being implemented frequently as
creative and passionate people try to make a difference, the list provides a solid and balanced
overview of important measures. Saha and Paterson felt if a city is hitting all thirty-six initiatives
it is a strong indication the city is well on its way to promoting sustainable activities. (Saha and
Paterson, 2008, p.26) One of the dangers with using an analytical index with specific examples, as
Saha and Paterson have, is any programs or activities left off the index but being implemented by
towns will fall under the scope of the index, resulting in a lower score. However, being specific
and limiting options is important when asking people to respond to the survey; it prevents
confusion, room for personal interpretation, and it keeps questions manageable for the respondent
and the responses manageable when analyzing.
29
Saha and Paterson‟s sustainability index is the most recently developed of the indices
within this paper. In the process of developing their index, Portney, Jepson, and Conroy‟s
measurement indices were all examined and compared side by side. (Saha and Paterson, 2008, p.
24-25) From these other studies as well as a literature search, Saha and Paterson compiled an
exhaustive list of sustainability measures which was reduced in size by a panel of sustainability
experts. (Saha and Paterson, 2008, p. 23) While the index lists some very specific programs it is
the most relevant index examined in this paper and will be used in the following three case studies
to help determine the success of the cities in establishing sustainability practices.
Methodology
Primarily, the resources and research for this paper came from secondary sources.
Research articles and books were studied through a literature search in the area of measuring
sustainable development efforts of municipalities. Several professional journals, the American
Planning Association, the Journal of Planning Education and Research, the Journal of Planning
Literature, provided the bulk of the relevant articles. The author's findings were then compiled to
provide an overview of research relating to municipal sustainability efforts and the measurement
techniques used by the authors. Each researcher's sustainability index was placed in chart format
and compared side by side. After weighing the benefits and downfalls of the measurement
techniques, Saha and Paterson‟s index was selected and used as the framework of comparison for
3 case studies; Wilmington (DE), Philadelphia (PA), and New York (NY).
The three case studies were completed to examine the second research question proposed
by this paper; What sustainability practices are being taken in three cities in the US and, based on
the index, are they successful and are they balancing the “Three Es” of sustainability? Each case
study includes a brief history of the cities in their quest to become more sustainable. The cities
30
websites, comprehensive plans, and sustainability plans were examined to help answer the above
questions. Wilmington (DE), Philadelphia (PA), and New York (NY) were chosen for the case
studies because they are geographically located near one another yet they represent three
distinctly different population sizes. All three have also indicated, verbally and in writing, an
interest in increasing sustainability within their jurisdiction. The case studies will only analyze
information gathered from key city documents such as a comprehensive plan, a sustainability
plan, and websites. While this information will be stable, rely on previously existing information,
and contain exact information, policies, and plans, relying solely on documents can lead to an
unintended bias on the researchers end and it can also lead to a partial analysis because only
information the researcher can access will be analyzed. Interviews and surveys will not be
completed.
As determined in the previous section, the analytical criteria applied to each city is as
follows:
31
Table 3: Measurement of Sustainability for Case Studies
Measurement of Sustainability for Case Studies
Saha and Paterson (2008)
Expert Identified Sustainability Measures
Environmental Protection Activities
Water quality protection
Economic Development Activities
Infill development
Curbside recycling
Business retention program
Open space preservation
Cluster/targeted economic development
Environmentally sensitive area protection
Brownfield reclamation
Operation of inner-city public transit
Empowerment/enterprise zones
Environmental education programs
Local business incubator program
Environmental site design regulations
Tax incentives for environmentally friendly development
Energy conservation efforts (other than green building program)
Eco-industrial park development
Transportation demand management
Purchase of development rights/Transfer of development rights
Ecological footprint analysis
Agricultural protection zoning
Alternative energy offered to customers
Urban growth boundary/urban service boundary
Green procurement
Equity Activities
Neighborhood planning
Green building
Renewable energy use by city government
Youth opportunities and antigang program
Affordable housing provisions
Homeless prevention and intervention
Sustainable food systems or food security program
Living wage ordinance
Day care service for service sector and low-income employees
Job-housing balance
Mass transit access with local income subsidies
Women and minority owned business and investment programs
Incentive/Inclusionary zoning
Source: Saha and Paterson (2008)
32
Case Studies
Case Study 1: Wilmington, DE
Wilmington, Delaware has stated it is particularly interested in mitigating climate change
due to its location adjacent to the Delaware River and proximity to the Atlantic Ocean. Fears
include a rise in sea level, increase in the frequency and severity of weather related natural
disasters such as hurricanes, and an increase in the number of days where the temperature reaches
over 100 degrees. (Climate Sustainability Plan) In 2006, Mayor James M. Baker signed the
United States Conference of Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement. By signing this agreement,
Mayors from all over the country agree to the Kyoto Protocol targets of reducing carbon
emissions to below 1990 levels. The Kyoto Protocol calls for a reduction of carbon emissions 12
percent below 1990 levels by 2012 (Mayors Climate Protection Center). The Mayor has indicated,
on the city's webpage, "the City will address opportunities for energy footprint reductions:
1. by the business & development community;
2. by the City‟s residents; and
3. by the City in its own operations." (Climate Sustainability Plan)
Through this statement there is a recognition that if change is going to be made it needs to
be done with the collaborative efforts of the businesses, the residents, and the government.
In 2008, Mayor Baker, signed into effect, by executive order, Wilmington's Climate
Sustainability Plan. This plan outlined twelve specific actions and five other programs or policies
the city should take in its efforts to address climate change and creates a new goal of a 20 percent
reduction of 2008 emissions levels by 2020 (Table 4).
33
Table 4: Sustainability Actions Outlined in Mayor Baker's Executive Order
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
City of Wilmington's Actions to Respond to Climate Change
The City will create a Wilmington Energy Leaders Roundtable - a business group which will design and lead the corporate
response in Wilmington to the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the municipal carbon footprint.
The City will actively engage with the State of Delaware on its newly created Sustainable Energy Utility to identify and
effectively bring Wilmington business and residential energy efficiency projects to the utility for financial incentives and
funding.
The City will create a program of outreach to Wilmington citizens to educate them about climate change. The City will
prepare materials to assist residents in understanding and defining long-held behavior patterns of energy and resource
waste which must be changed for the good of all the citizens of Wilmington today and for future generations. The City will
also prepare accompanying materials which will set forth ideas, paths, projects and goals for the average citizen to
implement in order to reduce individual or household carbon footprints.
The City will continue to implement actions such as those listed below to reduce its energy footprint:
1. PhillyCarShare Wilmington – a program to reduce unnecessary vehicle miles traveled in the City.
2. City/County Building Energy Efficiency – the City partnered with New Castle County to make the
City/County Building more energy efficient. Changes to date have included upgrades to the HVAC system
and lighting efficiency.
3. Citywide Curbside Recyclables Collection Program – recycling reduces the overall energy use in
manufacturing the products used by residents and businesses.
4. Creation of a Storm Water Utility, including credits for on-site management of stormwater/reduction of
impervious footprint – reducing stormwater going to the sewer system will reduce the energy use at the
wastewater treatment plant
The City will train all of its employees to be community leaders in the move toward reduction of carbon footprints. An
awards program will be developed for the employees who create the most rapid positive energy-saving changes in their
jobs and in their communities.
The City will update and revise all of its building codes to incorporate state of the art code language which mandates but
also rewards owners/ builders/architects who move rapidly toward reduction of carbon footprints by use of green
techniques in their building/rehabilitation efforts.
The City will establish an Energy Champion Award for residents and community groups that significantly reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. This category will be added to the annual Wilmington Awards Program which recognizes
Wilmington leaders.
The City will have a standing committee with a cross-section of members from various departments which will
continuously review and act on projects and ideas involving Climate Change and make recommendations to the
administration on a regular basis regarding necessary policy actions.
The City will implement a Sustainable Future Purchasing Policy that places priority on purchasing Energy Star equipment
for City buildings and operations. The City will also introduce educational campaigns such as “Lights Out at Night” and
“Lights Out When Not In Use” in a further effort to reduce governmental energy use. All City employees will be educated
about climate change, greenhouse gas emissions and energy use as it relates to their work and the City‟s Climate Change
Strategy.
The City will hire an energy services company, referred to as an ESCO, to identify and implement energy efficiency
projects in the City‟s water and wastewater operations and City buildings, including the police headquarters, emergency
operations center, fire stations and the Municipal Complex. In addition, the City will evaluate, and implement where
appropriate, energy generation projects using non-fossil fuel technologies (such as solar and digester gas).
The City will implement a fleet policy to purchase clean fuels, implement diesel retrofits, and purchase vehicles that are
the most fuel-efficient, low-emission vehicles available that will meet the business needs of the City. (The City fleet
consists of public safety, police, fire, emergency management, public works, parks, special purpose vehicles, and general
purpose sedans. The sedans are generally E-85 compatible, and the City has an E-85 fueling station.)
The City will build on the work begun by the Wilmington Beautification Commission‟s “Trees for Wilmington” working
group to expand the City‟s tree-planting efforts to increase the tree canopy and reduce “heat island” conditions. Efforts will
include partnerships with, among others, the Department of Agriculture, Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control and the Delaware Horticultural Center.
Use of teleconferencing rather than traveling to meetings when possible
Installation of bike racks at all City buildings and public areas
Work with WILMAPCO to identify additional ways to improve the City‟s bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure
Installation of either green roofs or photovoltaic on all City buildings
Instituting an environmentally preferable purchasing policy
Source: Mayor James M. Baker‟s Executive Order 2008-4: Wilmington‟s Climate Sustainability Plan
34
Part of the Sustainability Plan indicated the City's Climate Change Strategy should be
included in the next update of the City's comprehensive plan. This occurred in 2009 when the
Comprehensive Development Plan was amended to include the Climate Change Initiatives. (CPC
Memorandum: Resolution 10-09) The Mayor also voluntarily joined the Climate Registry which
is a non-profit organization that provides a "consistent and transparent standards to calculate,
verify and publicly report greenhouse gas emissions into a single registry."(The Climate Registry;
Department of Planning Memorandum: RE: Resolution 10-09)
Through the 2008 executive order, the City had publicly indicated approximately
seventeen actions it was pursuing in an effort to achieve greater environmental sustainability. The
amendment to the Land Use Plan summarized the implementation of the Executive Order and
stated the Wilmington Energy Leaders Roundtable was created consisting of business entities in
Wilmington and representatives from various government departments. They are currently
working on creating a Climate Pledge Program. The City also had a technical energy audit of the
city buildings and operations and amended the Capital Budget and the Capital Improvements
Program to encourage energy efficiency in City buildings and infrastructure in line with the
recommendations from the audit. Voluntary workshops and department trainings are being
offered to further the education of employees in the reduction of energy consumption and carbon
footprint. Educational outreach programs and an Energy Champion Award were created to raise
awareness among residents. Further initiatives include the "Think Green for Change" campaign,
improvements to the City's building infrastructure, the addition of E-85 bio-fuels and hybrid
vehicles to the city fleet, a single stream curbside recycling program, and the addition of green
design guidelines to the South Walnut Street Urban Renewal Plan. (A City-wide Plan of Land
Use, 38-45) A full list of completed or projects currently underway can be found below:
35
Table 5: Wilmington Delaware's Completed or Currently Active Initiatives
Completed or Currently Active Initiatives
Transportation
1
PhillyCarShare Wilmington: a program to reduce unnecessary vehicle miles traveled in the City.
City Operations
2
City/County Building Energy Efficiency: the City has been working with New Castle County to make the City/County
Building energy efficient. Changes to date have included upgrades to the HVAC system and lighting efficiency.
3
6
Fleet use of biofuels (E-85)
Intelligent management of stormwater in the sewer network to minimize impacts of discharges into area streams
Creation of a Storm Water Utility, including credits for on-site management of stormwater/reduction of impervious
footprint – reducing stormwater going to the sewer system will reduce the energy use at the wastewater treatment plant
LEED Silver design on a new City facility
7
Greater protections for public health through enhancements in water treatment technology
8
Plans for desalination systems to assure water supply capabilities for the future
9
Enhancement of water storage for drought management
10
Participation in international conferences on technology and sustainability
4
5
Residents and Communities
11
South Wilmington Urban Renewal Plan design guidelines, similar to LEED standards
12
City-wide Recyclables Collection: recycling reduces the overall energy use in manufacturing the products used by
residents and businesses.
13
Community Garden Program (Delaware Center for Horticulture)
14
Healthy Wilmington 2010 (Health Planning Council) health promotion and disease prevention through individual,
organizational and community involvement
City Environment
15
Beautification Commission‟s "Think Green for a Change" promotion
16
Urban Forest Canopy study by Delaware Center for Horticulture
17
Tree City USA designation for the last 16 years
18
Wilmington Beautification Commission
19
Lush Color Project
20
Streetscape enhancements and the management of plantings
21
Tree plantings and monitoring Program (Delaware Center for Horticulture)
22
Conversion of an open water storage reservoir into an open green space
23
Plans for reforestation activities around Hoopes reservoir for source water quality protection
24
Investments in Rock Manor Golf course to assure open space preservation
Economic Development
25
Green Industry promotion
Source: http://www.wilmingtonde.gov/greencity/strategy.htm
A list of future strategies and opportunities are included in the Land Use Plan in an effort to
further the goal reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These recommendations are listed in the table
below:
36
Table 6: Future Climate Change Opportunities / Climate Change Strategies
Wilmington's Future Strategies and Opportunities
City Operations
a.
b.
Create a standing committee with a cross section of members from various departments to continually review and act on
projects and ideas involving climate change. The committee should make recommendations to the administration on a
regular basis regarding necessary policy actions.
Update residential building codes to incorporate the 2009 International Energy Conservation Code. In addition,
commercial building codes should be updated to be consistent with the most recent ASHRAE model code for commercial
buildings. New state of the art codes should mandate, but also reward, owner/builder/architects who move rapidly
towards reductions of carbon footprints through the use of green techniques in new construction and rehabilitation. To
supplement this, the City should work with the Building Codes Assistance Project (BCAP) to obtain assistance with
administration of the new codes.
c.
Review existing codes, plans and subdivision regulations to remove obstacles impeding green design. The City should
develop design guidelines to respond to specific conditions and greening opportunities. Design guidelines should address
streets, streetscapes, water efficient landscaping, trails, parks and open space, buildings, and parking.
d.
Lead by example and implement one or more of the following actions to create more sustainable City buildings:
(1) Require that all buildings constructed through municipal contracts be LEED certified; and
e.
f.
g.
(2) Require that all construction related to municipal contracts be EPA Energy Star Certified.
Require at least one City employee to obtain LEED professional accreditation
Continue to support the work of the Wilmington Beautification Commission, Trees for Wilmington working group, and
the Delaware Center for Horticulture to expand the City's tree planting efforts to increase the City's total tree canopy and
reduce the heat island conditions. Partnerships should be expanded to include the Delaware Department of Agriculture
and the Delaware Department of Natural Resource and Environment Control.
Increase involvement with Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI). ICLEI can be used as an avenue to share
information with other cities and act as an advocate for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
h.
Implement a Sustainable Future Purchasing Policy that places priority on purchasing Energy Star equipment for City
building and operations. The City should continue to promote educational campaigns such as "Lights Out at Night" and
"Lights Out When Not In Use," in an effort to further reduce municipal energy use.
i.
Move forward with capital projects that will implement energy efficient projects, such as the projects identified from the
energy audit completed by Honeywell Building Solutions for the Department of Public Works. The City should continue
to evaluate and implement energy generation projects using non-fossil fuel technologies such as digester gas, potential
green roofs, and photovoltaic when appropriate.
j.
Continue to purchase clean fuels, implement diesel retrofits, and purchase vehicles that are the most fuel efficient, low
emission vehicles available that will meet the business needs of the City. The City fleet serves public safety, police, fire,
emergency management, public works and parks and includes special purpose vehicles and general purpose sedans. The
sedans are generally E-85 compatible, and the City has an E-85 fueling station.
k.
Continue to expand on transportation opportunities through the Wilmington Initiatives partnership with DelDOT and
WILMAPCO. The City may take into consideration participation in programs like the "Walkable Communities
Initiative" and "Complete Streets" that provide multi-modal transportation that identifies ways to increase bike and
pedestrian traffic.
Reintroduce a car share program to the City. Car share programs provide members with access to a fleet of vehicles on
an hourly basis, eliminating the need to won a private vehicle. Employee use of car share vehicles reduces the size of the
city fleet otherwise need to meet operational demands.
l.
Wilmington's Future Strategies and Opportunities (cont.)
Business and Development Community
a.
b.
Continue to sponsor and support the Energy Leaders Roundtable, including the Wilmington Climate Change Pledge
Program. These business energy leaders should be recognized for making energy savings choices.
Work with the Sustainable Energy Utility to identify public-private partnerships and programs that will benefit the City.
The City should use the SEU to identify and provide financial incentives for energy efficiency and renewable energy
practices in the City.
37
c.
d.
Finalize and implement the Wilmington Green Buildings Program, modeled after LEED, which is designed to minimize
environmental impact for new commercial construction and operation. Developers that adhere to the Wilmington Green
Buildings Program rating system should be eligible for added incentives, such as public recognition through signage
and/or an expedited plan review process.
Educate the development community when updating building codes.
Residential Community
a.
b.
Continue to expand the outreach program to educate Wilmington citizens about climate change and increase awareness
about the issue. The City website should be continually updated to provide educational opportunities to the public.
Facilitate linking residents with the Sustainable Energy Utility to provide financial incentives for property owners to
implement energy efficiency projects.
Source: Wilmington's City-Wide Plan of Land Use (pg.42-45)
The City has set up a website as a resource for residents who are interested in helping the
City and themselves reduce carbon emissions. There is a portal to the Climate Sustainability
Plan's section of the website located on the homepage of the City's website as well as a link on the
Mayor's Page. However, further links to the Plan could not be located. On the Climate
Sustainability Plan's web page are links to actions the City has taken, the City's government
documents regarding the Climate Sustainability Plan, and tips for residents to follow to reduce
their carbon footprint and be more 'green'.
The City of Wilmington does not currently have a progress report publicly available on
their website to help gauge the effectiveness of the completed initiatives or those that are
underway. They are members of the Climate Registry and are in the process of establishing a
baseline for the City's greenhouse gas emissions and have indicated an annual report will be
issued to allow residents and city officials gauge the success and progress of the efforts being
made. (Mayor Baker Sets Forth Proactive Stance, 2008, p.3)
When analyzed using the sustainability criteria set forth by Saha and Paterson, the city of
Wilmington, Delaware scored 22 points out of a possible 36 points (see Appendix A, below)
38
participating in 66.1% of the total sustainability initiatives . When broken down into
environmental protection, economic development, and equity initiatives, to better analyze the
balance between the three areas of sustainability, the scores were 11 out of 14(78.6%), 6 out of
11(54.5%), and 5 out of 11(45.4%) respectively. When looking at the entire city, all of the
programs, policies, and initiatives being taken within the span of the city‟s departments, there are
programs to address and further “Three Es” of sustainability. Even so, there is still a strong pull
towards environmental sustainability programs with almost more than twice as many programs
being enacted by the city despite the number of initiatives in the index for each “E” from being
close to equal. If the analysis of sustainability initiatives is done based solely on Wilmington’s
Sustainability Climate Plan, a balance between the “Three Es” of sustainability is much weaker.
Under this analysis the city of Wilmington scored 12 out of 36 points (33.3%) with a further
breakdown of environmental protection initiatives scoring 10 out of 14 (71.4%), economic
development initiatives scoring 2 out of 11 (18.2%), and equity initiatives scoring a 0 out of 11
(0%). The preference for environmental sustainability is clearly dominant under this plan.
The city of Wilmington has made an active effort to focus on environmental sustainability
above social or economic sustainability in their sustainability plan. On the surface this is evident
through the inclusion of word climate in the title of the plan and a strong focus and commitment
in the reduction of greenhouse gasses. Delving deeper into the purpose of the initiatives either
completed, currently underway, or being suggested as future actions for the City to take, the plan
shows a numerical bias towards environmental sustainability when analyzed against the
sustainability index provided by Saha and Paterson. The sustainability plan does not provide a
successful balance between the “Three Es” of sustainability.
In order to determine if the city of Wilmington is taking actions, as a whole, to be more
39
sustainable, the analysis was expanded to study all the city departments and their policies,
programs, and initiatives. When compared against the Saha and Paterson index, the results
showed that while the City is still showing a preference towards environmentally sustainable
programs, there is stronger presence of economic development and equity activities than the
previous analysis showed.
40
Case Study 2: Philadelphia, PA
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania began its quest to increase its sustainability efforts in 1999
when it joined ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability. Former Mayor John F. Street
created a Sustainability Task Force which produced a report titled 2007 Local Action Plan for
Climate Change. The plan established a goal for the City to cut greenhouse emissions by 10% by
2010 and detailed several actions the city would be taking (Philadelphia Releases Local Climate
Action Plan, Mayor John F. Street Announces City‟s Local Action Plan for Climate Change).
While Mayor Street could not run for office again due to term limits in the November 2007
elections, that publication provided the springboard for what would become the City's
sustainability plan, Greenworks Philadelphia.
Mayor Michael A. Nutter followed in his predecessor's footsteps and established an Office
of Sustainability soon after he became Mayor in a effort to help Philadelphia become "the
greenest city in America" (Greenworks Philadelphia). The Sustainability Working Group
published Greenworks Philadelphia and broadened the goal of the 2007 Local Action Plan for
Sustainability to include goals in the areas of energy, environment, equity, economy, and
engagement. Under each of the five goals are defined targets the city is reaching for. (Table 7).
Each target has an established baseline, a projection for where the city feels the number to be in
2015 without intervention, the new target under Greenworks Philadelphia, and the savings if the
new target is reached.
41
Table 7: Goals and Targets from Greenworks Philadelphia
Greenworks Philadelphia Goals and Targets
Philadelphia
reduces its
vulnerability to
rising energy
prices
Philadelphia
reduces its
environmental
footprint
Lower City
Government
Energy
Consumption by
30 Percent
Reduce
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions by 20
Percent
Reduce
Citywide
Building Energy
consumption by
10 Percent
Retrofit 15
Percent of
Housing Stock
with Insulation,
Air Sealing and
Cool Roofs
Goals
Philadelphia
delivers more
equitable access
to healthy
neighborhoods
Targets
Improve Air
Quality toward
Attainment of
Federal Standards
Manage
Stormwater to
Meet Federal
Standards
Provide Park and
Recreation
Resources within
10 Minutes of 75
Percent of
Residents
Divert 70 Percent
of Solid Waste
from Landfill
Bring Local Food
within 10 Minutes
of 75 Percent
of Residents
Purchase and
Generate 20
Percent of
Electricity Used
in Philadelphia
from
Alternative
Energy Sources
Philadelphia
creates a
competitive
advantage from
sustainability
Philadelphians
unite to build a
sustainable future
Reduce Vehicle
Miles Traveled
by 10 Percent
Philadelphia is
the Greenest City
in America
Increase the State
of Good Repair
in Resilient
Infrastructure
Double the
Number of Lowand High-Skill
Green Jobs
Increase Tree
Coverage toward
30 Percent in
All
Neighborhoods
by 2025
Source: Greenworks Philadelphia
Having targets to goals is an important step towards sustainability, especially if an effort is
made to focus on the “Three Es” but, without suggestions or initiatives guiding city and resident's
actions the targets are unlikely to be met. In the ninety-three page document, Greenworks
Philadelphia breaks down each target into specific initiatives and details the steps needed to reach
the set targets. There are over 150 initiatives in total with each target containing between 9 and
98. A chart detailing the goals, targets, and initiatives can be found in Appendix B.
42
The City of Philadelphia has a clean, easy to understand website that is intuitive. The
entire Greenworks Philadelphia plan is available for download and very easy to locate within the
web page. Each of the five goal areas established within the plan are represented by buttons at the
top of the page and when clicked the viewer is presented with information about the goal, the
targets associated with it, and some of the initiatives. To keep residents updated on sustainability
related news, the City maintains a Greenworks blog. The blog contains information about
different programs and events such as farmers markets and energy efficiency incentives. In
addition to the Greenworks Philadelphia website, the City maintains a website for the Office of
Sustainability. That website focuses primarily on environmental sustainability with energy
conservation initiatives, promotion of the Solar City Partnership, and information on green
buildings. One of the Office of Sustainability's major tasks is to increase energy efficiency within
the government which is in line with several of the targets under the Energy goal in the
Greenworks Plan. (Philadelphia Going Green)
The plan was made public in April of 2009, just eight months prior to the writing of this
report. (Mayor Nutter Unveils Plan) While base numbers have been calculated for the report,
follow-up numbers have yet to be determined so no progress reports is available at the moment.
The City‟s Energy and Sustainability subcommittee and the Energy and Sustainability Advisory
Board have been tasked with gathering data, analyzing the cities actions, and reporting on how the
City can become more efficient over the long term through the creation of goals and best practices
guidelines. (Plan of Action)
43
After analyzing the efforts of the entire city of Philadelphia, regardless of if the programs
have stated sustainability related goals; the city has scored a 31 out of 36 points with 86.1% of the
initiatives on the sustainability index being fulfilled. 13 out of 14 (92.9%) of the environmental
activities, 9 out of 11 (81.8%) economic activities, and 9 out of 11(81.8%) equity activities were
completed. The city of Philadelphia shows strong success in implementing sustainability
initiatives based on Saha and Paterson‟s index.
Philadelphia seems to have made a concerted effort to extend beyond environmental
sustainability in their sustainability plan. Greenworks Philadelphia is broken in to five sections
including sections specifically focusing on equity and economic issues. On its own, the plan
received a score of 19 out of 36, meaning it completed 52.7% of the stated sustainability actions.
The breakdown of the “Three Es” is as follows; environmental activities scored 12 out of 14,
economic development activities scored 5 out of 11, and equity activities scored 2 out of 11.
Despite effort and specific mention of environmental, economic, and equitable sustainability, the
strength of the plan lies in its environmental sustainability measures. That is not to say the plan
only had 5 economic sustainability and 2 equitable sustainability initiatives outlines, but rather
only those seven filled the criteria set forth by Saha and Paterson's index as the most important for
sustainability.
44
Case Study 3: New York, NY
In 2006, Mayor Bloomberg announced the creation of the Office of Long-Term Planning
and Sustainability to help identify issues, coordinate actions, and implement initiatives in an effort
to create a more sustainable city and address environmental issues facing the city. Mayor
Bloomberg created the Sustainability Advisory Board and over the next several months board
members and city officials met with a variety of people from the five City Boroughs, including
organizations, community leaders, and residents to identify the most important concerns, issues,
and ideas.(Mayor Bloomberg Announces Creation) The culmination of these community and
town hall meetings was PLANYC 2030, a 155page document detailing the city's concerns, goals,
and initiatives for becoming a more environmentally sensitive place to live, work, and play.
During this time, the mayor had a city wide carbon inventory conducted to establish a baseline
from which all future actions and initiatives can be measured for success. (Mayor Bloomberg
Announces Creation) Prior to publishing the plan, NYC became a member of ICLEI in 2001 and
signed the U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. By formally associating
with these groups the City had committed to a 7% reduction in greenhouse gasses from 1992
levels by 2012. (The Agreement - Mayors Climate Protection Center) However, with the
publication of PLANYC 2030, the city increased its commitment to reduce greenhouse gasses to
30% and expanded its scope to address issues and concerns related to “growth, an aging
infrastructure, and an increasingly precarious environment.” ( PLANYC 2030, 4) From the
public outreach sessions, ten goals were synthesized in the three previous mentioned areas of
concern (Table 8).
45
Table 8: PLANYC 2030: Goals
PLANYC 2030: Goals
Growth
1
2
3
Create homes for almost a million more New Yorkers, while making housing more
affordable and sustainable
Improve travel times by adding transit capacity for millions more residents, visitors,
and workers.
Ensure that all New Yorkers live within a 10–minute walk of a park
Aging Infrastructure
4
5
6
Develop critical back-up systems for our aging water network to ensure long-term
reliability
Reach a full "state of good repair" on New York City's roads, subways, and rails for
the first time in history
Provide cleaner, more reliable power for every New Yorker by upgrading our energy
infrastructure
Environment
7
Reduce global warming emissions by more than 30%
8
Achieve the cleanest air of any big city in America
9
Clean up all contaminated land in New York City
Open 90% of our waterways for recreation by reducing water pollution and
preserving our natural areas
10
Source: PLANYC 2030 Website; http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/challenge/challenge.shtml
PLANYC 2030 is divided into six different sections titled Land, Water, Transportation,
Energy, Air, and Climate Change. The ten goals established through community participation are
divided up among the six sections and each section provides a detailed plan, along with
initiatives, for how the city intends to resolve each problem and achieve each goal. Table 9
provides a summary of the City‟s plan and a more complete version of the table, including both
the plans and the specific initiatives, can be found in Appendix C: PLANYC 2030: Goals and
Initiatives.
46
Table 9: PLANYC 2030: Plan of Action
PLANYC 2030: Plan of Action
Housing
Continue publicly-initiated rezoning
Create new housing on public land
Explore additional areas of opportunity
Expand targeted affordability programs
Open Space
Make existing sites available to more New Yorkers
Expand usable hours at existing sites
Re-imagine the public realm
Brownfields
Make existing brownfield programs faster and more efficient
Expand enrollment into streamlined programs
Encourage greater community involvement in brownfield redevelopment
Identify remaining sites for cleanups
Water Quality
Continue implementing infrastructure upgrades
Pursue proven solutions to prevent stormwater from entering the system
Expand, track, and analyze new Best Management Practices (BMPs)on a broad scale
Water Networks
Ensure the quality of our drinking water
Create redundancy for aqueducts to New York City
Modernize in-city distribution
Transportation
Build and expand transit infrastructure
Improve transit service on existing infrastructure
Promote other sustainable modes
Improve traffic flow by reducing congestion
Achieve a state of good repair on our roads and transit system
Develop new funding sources
Energy
Improve energy planning
Reduce New York City‟s energy consumption
Expand the city‟s clean power supply
Modernize electricity delivery infrastructure
Air
Reduce road vehicle emissions
Reduce other transportation emissions
Reduce emissions from buildings
Pursue natural solutions to improve air quality
Understand the scope of the challenge
Climate Change
Avoided sprawl
Clean power
Efficient Buildings
Sustainable transportation
Source: PLANYC 2030
47
Through these initiatives, Mayor Bloomberg and NYC are not only addressing climate
change issues, but they are simultaneously and in coordination with the effort reduce greenhouse
gases, addressing social and economic issues. Initiatives such as develop new financing
strategies, preserve the existing stock of affordable housing throughout New York City, create or
enhance a public plaza in every community, and the initiatives to increase public transportation all
address some of the social needs of the city. However, despite the social sustainability aspect,
many of these initiatives have their roots in environmental sustainability.
Out of the three case studies, New York City is the only one with a published progress
report. The City has published a progress report for 2008 and 2009. The 2008 report details the
City‟s accomplishments for every month, a brief description of what has been done under each
goal, and which of the initiatives are underway along with a short progress report for each
initiative and what it has accomplished since 2007. The report also indicates, for each initiative, a
milestone for the next year (PLANYC Progress Report 2008). In 2009, the same format was used
to track initiative progress. A short progress report since 2008 was included along with future
milestones and an indication for whether the initiative is “on time”, “completed”, or “delayed” in
reaching its milestone. The 2009 progress report includes an important addition, not included in
the 2008 report; a report on the city‟s greenhouse gas reduction measures. The idea for PLANYC
2030 was primarily based on the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions within the city.
Mayor Bloomberg recognized in order to achieve a greenhouse gas reduction he and the city must
come at the challenge from multiple angles. Ultimately the success of this plan and all of its
initiatives will be measured by the overall reduction of greenhouse gasses. In 2009, the city had
achieved an actual reduction of 3.52 million metric tons CO2e or approximately 9.8% of their
reduction target (PLANYC Progress Report 2009; p 41). This number is based on the original
48
greenhouse gas inventory conducted in 2007.
In addition to a yearly progress report the City has published a yearly Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Inventory, New York City Wetlands: Regulatory Gaps and Other Threats, Climate
Risk Inventory, Think Locally, Act Globally: How Curbing Global Warming Emissions Can
Improve Local Public Health, a Sustainable Stormwater Management Plan, Long Term Plan to
Reduce Energy Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Municipal Buildings and
Operations, The New York City Greener, Greater, Buildings Plan, and New York City’s
Transformation to a Green Economy. The City has taken a substantial amount of time and
resources to explore and publish on many issues relating to sustainability. The creation of plans
indicates the City‟s seriousness in reaching its goals and solving the problems it will be facing in
the upcoming years related to growth, aging infrastructure, and the environment.
The analysis of New York City‟s sustainability efforts yielded strong sustainability score
of 30 out of 36 points meaning the City is taking part in over 83% of the sustainability initiatives
included in the Saha and Paterson index. Environmental activities received a score of 12 out of
14 (85.7%), economic activities scored 9 out of 11 (81.8%), and equity activities had a score of 9
out of 11 (81.8%). In addition to discovering the overall sustainability efforts of the City are
strong, the analysis for a balance among those actions showed New York City is successfully
balancing environmental, economic, and equitable sustainability through their programs and
initiatives.
However, a strong preference towards environmental sustainability is evident when
examining PLANYC 2030, on its own, under the Saha and Paterson index. The total sustainability
score drops to 15 out of 36 points with only 41.6% of the actions being taken through the
sustainability plan. The environmental actions stayed dominant with a score of 11 out of 14
49
(78.5%) but the economic development and equity initiatives dropped dramatically to scores of 3
out of 11 (27.2%) and 1 out of 11 (9%), respectively.
From this analysis, PLANYC 2030, as a sustainability plan, is not balancing
environmental, economic, and equitable sustainability though its initiatives. Again we see a
strong focus on environmental sustainability despite the plan‟s stated goals of addressing growth
and an aging infrastructure in addition to environmental issues facing the City. While the plan
does include actions to address housing issues such as preserving the affordable housing stock,
which is in line with the growth goals and the idea of equitable sustainability, many of the
initiatives are aimed at increasing the development opportunities in order to increase housing
opportunities in the city. The other goals and initiatives within the plan that can be considered
supporting equitable sustainability include increasing the public plazas in communities, ensuring
all citizens have access to public parks and green space, and increasing transportation options.
Beyond those actions, equitable sustainability is a limited concept within PLANYC 2030.
Economic development actions within the plan include an entire section dedicated to Brownfield
redevelopment but when it comes to fostering green businesses or growing and retaining local
businesses, the plan does not suggest any actions. This may be due to a separate publication,
called New York City’s Transformation to a Green Economy, which addresses growing the City‟s
green economy. (New York City‟s Transformation to a Green Economy) The separate report
contains thirty initiatives to prime the City to become a center for Green Businesses.
50
Concluding Remarks
After analyzing the cities based on the sustainability index developed by Saha and
Paterson it became evident how well the cities fared was strongly related to whether the entire city
was examined or whether only the published sustainability plans were evaluated. Just evaluating
the plans lead to a much lower score then when examining the entire city. The difference in the
scope and success in balancing sustainability efforts when looking at the city's sustainability plan
verses the entire city's actions may be the result of several factors. First is the unclear definition
of sustainability and a lack of understanding about sustainability. Because the definition and
ideas surrounding sustainability are still up for debate, deciding on which one to use can be a
challenge. (Wheeler, 2000; Portney, 2003; Conroy, 2006; Saha, 2009) For some people, the
emphasis may be on environmental sustainability because of its public popularity and the
familiarity people have with the idea.
In examining the case studies, many of the economic and equitable sustainability
initiatives were often found under the control of already existing departments. For example,
economic sustainability programs might be found under the Office of Economic Development
and equitable sustainability programs might be under the Housing Authority or the Health
Department. Because sustainability is still a new concept, at least in the realm of government
action, the existing programs and initiatives are remaining in their old homes while Offices of
Sustainability or Sustainability Workgroups are creating their own sustainability programs but
leaving out the issues of economics and equity. The sustainability plans presented by
Wilmington, Philadelphia, and New York City are a great start towards increasing sustainability
in our urban centers however, in future iterations and as the plans evolve, the plans, as well as the
51
Offices of Sustainability or the Sustainability Working Groups, should work to increase the
interconnections and communications between departments. If done correctly, programs focusing
on all three aspects of sustainability can be created using a stronger set of resources in order to
create longer lasting positive impacts and avoid redundant or even competing initiatives.
Table 10: Sustainable Index Summary Whole City Analysis v. Sustainability Plan Analysis
Sustainability Index Summary
Wilmington,
Philadelphia,
DE
PA
Whole City Analysis
Environment
Economic
Equitable
Sustainability Plan
Analysis
Environment
Economic
Equitable
New York,
NY
22
11
6
5
31
13
9
9
30
12
9
9
12
10
2
0
19
12
5
2
15
11
3
1
Out of the three sustainability plans created, Greenworks Philadelphia has the greatest
number of sustainability actions matching up with what Saha and Paterson concluded were the
thirty-six most important sustainability indicators. (Table 10) Under closer examination, the
Greenworks Philadelphia plan was also the most balanced plans in terms of environmental,
economic, and equitable sustainability despite the low number of applicable economic and equity
focused programs. The City of Philadelphia also took the top spot in overall sustainability and a
balance of the “Three Es” when all city programs, actions, and initiatives were examined. New
York City came in a close second with only one less initiative meeting Saha and Paterson‟s index
when analyzing all of the city initiatives. PLANYC2030 was not as close to Greenworks
Philadelphia when only the sustainability plans were examined.
52
One important aspect of a city's sustainability efforts left out of the Saha and Paterson
index is some measure of accountability or progress reporting done by the city. If there are no
results from the sustainability actions, continuing those specific programs is a waste of time,
resources, money and is, by definition, unsustainable. In addition to ensuring programs are
making the promised improvements, progress reports allow for the early identification of
problematic or ineffective programs so adjustments can be made. The reports provide a gauge for
the effectiveness and impact of the initiatives and by having actual measurement data to present to
stakeholders, along with a free flow of information about the reports, the door is opened for a
greater acceptance of future sustainability efforts. The only city from the case studies to currently
have a progress report is New York City. Being the longest running sustainability plan, they have
produced progress reports for 2008 and 2009. Philadelphia has indicated a sustainability progress
report will be issued sometime soon by the City‟s Energy and Sustainability subcommittee and
the Energy and Sustainability Advisory Board. While Philadelphia has the strongest
sustainability plan and also scored the highest when examining the entire city, New York City‟s
citywide analysis was only one point shy of Philadelphia and their sustainability plan has
produced actual progress reports. Because the two cities are so close in numbers and actual
results are being calculated and tracked by New York City, I would rank both cities high on
achieving success in promoting sustainable initiatives.
53
Recommendations
Creating a sustainability plan is an important step for increasing sustainability within a
city because it outlines goals, initiatives and actions however the plans need to increase their
scope to include more than just environmental sustainability initiatives. The three sustainability
plans examined in the case studies all showed a strong bias towards environmental sustainability.
While this is an important issue, particularly in the face of climate change, economic and
equitable sustainability play just as vital of a role in the health of our cities, our world, and can
also have an effect on climate change. The sustainability plans need to increase the number of
economic and equitable sustainability initiatives to provide a better balance of the “Three Es”.
One way to accomplish this is by including all the actions and initiatives taking place across
different city departments and agencies within the sustainability plan. This will help the city
identify all the efforts being made towards creating a more sustainable city and it will help to
encourage communication between departments and offices within the city. These open
communication lines will allow the city to provide programs and services more efficiently and
reduce the number duplicated efforts and competing programs. The final recommendation is to
have cities identify which programs in their sustainability plan fall under each of the “Three Es”.
Because the concept of the “Three Es” is fairly well know and a balance between the three is the
ultimate goal in sustainability, by specifying where the initiatives fall under will allow cities to
better understand how successfully they are achieving a balance and it provide residents a way to
quickly gauge the city‟s efforts in all three areas.
Based on the case studies, all three cities have made good efforts, city wide, in meeting
what Saha and Paterson have concluded to be, a city's key sustainability actions with each city
54
completing over 65% of the possible actions. However, since the percentages drops to as low as
33.3% when the index is only applied to the city's sustainability plan, an effort should be made in
the three cities to include all of the citywide actions and initiatives, in the sustainability plans.
Wilmington, Delaware lacks the most economic and equitable sustainability initiatives regardless
of if the entire city is analyzed or just the sustainability plan. In order to create a better balance of
the sustainability triangle, more programs focusing on those two areas should be
promoted. Because Philadelphia and New York have such strong sustainability efforts when
examining the entire city, both should expand their sustainability plan to include the economic
and equity initiatives.
All cities interested in increasing their sustainability efforts should publish progress
reports. These reports should be made public and easy to access. A progress report lets
stakeholders know how successful the city is in fulfilling its targets, goals, and initiatives. If the
sustainability activities are administered correctly and a progress report indicates positive changes
for the city, support for future sustainability efforts will be easier to garner. A progress report will
also allow the city to identify problematic or ineffective programs quickly and either make
adjustments or eliminate the action.
Future Research
There are so many unanswered questions based around the subject of sustainability. Future
research should explore the balance of sustainability to a greater extent. Because a complete
balance is impractical researchers should focus on what is an appropriate balance between the
“Three E‟s” of sustainability. Campbell suggested in his paper that a sustainable plan should be
able to find connections and actions that provide benefits to more than one of the three "E"s of
55
sustainability at once. (Campbell, 1996) The sustainability plans of New York and Philadelphia
both indicated if the initiatives and actions of one section also fulfilled those in another section.
Are other cities completing this step when creating sustainability plans and to what extent are
cities beginning to look at connections between programs and integrating multiple departments
into program implementation? Once this is established, the effectiveness of interdepartmental
communication can be studied in regards to implementing sustainable initiatives.
With the completion of thorough sustainability plans, progress reports are beginning to
surface. Once they do, an analysis should be completed to better gauge the success of the stated
sustainability initiatives. These reports will also allow researchers to have a better understanding
of the question asked by Portney; how serious are city's sustainability efforts? The characteristics
of cities with successful sustainability plans should be analyzed as well. Opposite to successful
cities are the cities that have been unable to implement sustainable initiatives. The barriers these
cities face should be examined and hopefully suggestions or solutions may be derived from the
findings. In addition to studying the successes and the barriers to sustainability within cities, the
process a city goes through, from the initial spark of an idea to the successful implementation of
sustainability plans, should be studied.
Another issue that might be of interest to study in the future would be to examine cities
with a more balanced sustainability plan for evidence of the negative aspects of gentrification
primarily, are the poor or disadvantaged being pushed out of the cities or their neighborhoods due
to the consequences of a city‟s sustainability initiatives?
Some cities, such as Wilmington (DE), Philadelphia (PA), and New York (NY) are tackling
the issues of sustainability head on. They have created sustainability plans and even Offices of
56
Sustainability but their sustainability efforts could become even more effective if they work to
break down the barriers between the different departments within their governments to build
coordination and communication. By doing this, they would be taking into account all aspects of
sustainability, not just environmental sustainability, and begin to tackle environmental, economic,
and social/equitable problems from multiple dimensions and with a holistic point of view.
57
Appendix A: Case Study Analysis
Table 11: Case Study Analysis of City Wide Policies, Programs, and Actions
Cities
Saha and Paterson (2008)
Environmental Protection Activities
Wilmington (DE)
Philadelphia (PA)
New York (NY)
Water quality protection
Y
Y
Y
Curbside recycling
Y
Y
Y
Open space preservation
Y
Y
Y
Environmentally sensitive area protection
Y
Y
Y
Operation of inner-city public transit
N
Y
Y
Environmental education programs
Y
Y
Y
Environmental site design regulations
Y
N
N
Energy conservation efforts (other than green building program)
Y
Y
Y
Transportation demand management
Y
Y
Y
Ecological footprint analysis
Y
Y
Y
Alternative energy offered to customers
N
Y
Y
Green procurement
Y
Y
Y
Green building
Y
Y
Y
Renewable energy use by city government
N
Y
N
Infill development
Y
Y
Y
Business retention program
Y
Y
Y
Cluster/targeted economic development
Y
Y
Y
Brownfield reclamation
Y
Y
Y
Empowerment/enterprise zones
N
Y
Y
Local business incubator program
Y
Y
Y
Tax incentives for environmentally friendly development
N
Y
Y
Eco-industrial park development
Y
N
Y
Purchase of development rights/Transfer of development rights
N
Y
Y
Agricultural protection zoning
N
Y
N
Urban growth boundary/urban service boundary
N
N
N
Neighborhood planning
Y
Y
Y
Youth opportunities and antigang program
Y
Y
Y
Affordable housing provisions
Y
Y
Y
Homeless prevention and intervention
Y
Y
Y
Sustainable food systems or food security program
N
Y
N
Living wage ordinance
N
Y
Y
Day care service for service sector and low-income employees
N
N
Y
Job-housing balance
N
N
N
Mass transit access with local income subsidies
N
Y
Y
Women and minority owned business and investment programs
Y
Y
Y
Incentive/Inclusionary zoning
N
Y
Y
22
31
30
Economic Development Activities
Equity Activities
Total 'Y'
58
Table 12: Case Study Analysis of Sustainability Plan Policies, Programs, and Actions
Saha and Paterson (2008)
Environmental Protection Activities
Cities
Wilmington (DE)
Philadelphia (PA)
New York (NY)
Water quality protection
Y
Y
Y
Curbside recycling
Y
Y
Y
Open space preservation
Environmentally sensitive area protection
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Operation of inner-city public transit
N
Y
Y
Environmental education programs
Y
Y
Y
Environmental site design regulations
Y
N
N
Energy conservation efforts (other than green building program)
Y
Y
Y
Transportation demand management
N
Y
Y
Ecological footprint analysis
Y
Y
Y
Alternative energy offered to customers
N
Y
Y
Green procurement
Y
Y
N
Green building
Y
Y
Y
Renewable energy use by city government
N
Y
N
Infill development
N
N
Y
Business retention program
N
Y
N
Cluster/targeted economic development
Y
Y
N
Brownfield reclamation
N
N
Y
Empowerment/enterprise zones
N
N
N
Local business incubator program
Tax incentives for environmentally friendly development
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Eco-industrial park development
Y
N
N
Purchase of development rights/Transfer of development rights
N
N
N
Agricultural protection zoning
N
Y
N
Urban growth boundary/urban service boundary
N
N
N
Youth opportunities and antigang program
N
N
N
N
N
N
Affordable housing provisions
N
Y
N
Homeless prevention and intervention
N
N
N
Sustainable food systems or food security program
N
Y
N
Living wage ordinance
N
N
N
Day care service for service sector and low-income employees
N
N
N
Job-housing balance
N
N
N
Mass transit access with local income subsidies
N
N
N
Women and minority owned business and investment programs
N
N
N
Incentive/Inclusionary zoning
N
N
Y
12
20
15
Economic Development Activities
Equity Activities
Neighborhood planning
Total 'Y'
59
Appendix B: Greenworks Philadelphia: Goals and Initiatives
Table 13: Greenworks Philadelphia Goals, Targets, Initiatives, and Actions
ENERGY
TARGET 1: LOWER CITY GOVERNMENT ENERGY USE BY 30 PERCENT
Energy Efficient Capital Investments
Triplex + City Hall ESCO project
Target smaller, satellite buildings for ESCO investment (50 buildings)
Implement Target Energy Budgets
Encourage Conservation Among Employees
Install New Lighting
Install motion sensing switches and timed lighting in City buildings
Replace Yellow/Green Traffic Signal lights with LED
Upgrade Recreation Center Outdoor Lighting
Include Energy Conservation In Future Building Maintenance Contracts
Identify Less-Expensive and Alternative Electrical Sources
Develop Energy Load/Demand Management Practices
Create Capital Budget Energy Guidelines
Use Future Energy Costs to Inform Building Acquisition/Expansion Decisions
City Employee Car Management Plan
Reduce City Fleet by 500 additional cars
Increase average MPG in city fleet
Continue Car Sharing Program
Develop gasoline usage budgets for departments
Investigate Conversion of City Buildings from Steam Loop to Natural Gas
Five Year Strategic Energy Plan (Water Department)
TARGET 2: REDUCE CITYWIDE BUILDING ENERGY CONSUMPTION BY 10 PERCENT
Develop Energy-Efficiency Building Guidelines
Tie the Energy-Efficiency Code to Tax Abatements
Grant Floor Area Ratio Bonuses
Fast Track LEED-Certified and Energy Efficient Buildings
Electronic Plan Development Review
Disclose Building Energy Use During Real Estate Transactions
Create a Sustainable Energy Authority
Reposition the Philadelphia Home Improvement Loan Program
Create Revolving Loan Fund for Tenant Improvement Work
Develop Power Purchase Pools for Small Businesses
Install Smart Meters
Include Feedback on Utility Bills
Create Neighborhood Competitions
Develop a Citywide Energy-Efficiency Marketing Campaign
Work with School District to develop curriculum around sustainability (focusing on energy savings, recycling, trees)
TARGET 3: RETROFIT 15 PERCENT OF HOUSING STOCK WITH INSULATION, AIR SEALING AND COOL
ROOFS
Expand Current Low-Income Housing Weatherization Efforts
Use the Sustainable Energy Authority to Create a Scalable Weatherization Program
Expand Scope of PGW’s Weatherization Program and Increase Size
Build Energy-Efficiency into Public and Low-Income Housing
60
TARGET 4: PRODUCE AND GENERATE 20 PERCENT OF ELECTRICITY USED IN PHILADELPHIA FROM
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES
Promote Renewable Power Purchase Agreements for Public Buildings
Reduce Regulatory Barriers to Solar Installation
Write a Guide for Solar Development
Report Solar Financing Options
Explore Vertical Axis Wind Turbines for Public Roofs
Create Biogas Cogeneration Facility at Northeast Wastewater Treatment Plant
Recycling Deicing Fluid
Install Geothermal System at Sewer Maintenance Facility
Explore ways to capture water power at Fairmount and Flat Rock dams (without compromising aesthetics)
ENERGY
TARGET 5: REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BY 20 PERCENT
Explore Opportunities for Philadelphia in Proposed Federal Cap and Trade Legislation
TARGET 6: IMPROVE AIR QUALITY TOWARD ATTAINMENT OF FEDERAL STANDARDS
Retrofit Diesel Vehicles
Replace filters and add diesel oxidation catalyst equipment on all City’s diesel vehicles
Require equipment used by private contractors on public works projects to adhere to AMS standards
Increase the Use of Biodiesel Fuel in City Fleet
Purchase 420,000 gallons of biodiesel and increase by 5% every year 5
Increase the Fleet’s Gas Mileage
Develop a Compressed Natural Gas Facility
Develop CNG fueling station
Purchase 15 CNG Trash Trucks
Purchase Hybrid Diesel Buses
SEPTA purchases 440 Hybrid Diesel buses 5 SEPTA – 2010
Facilitate Use of Electric Cars
Permit electric cars on city streets
Plugs in parking lots, city streets
Increase the Number of Hybrid or CNG Taxis
Initiate Queuing Preference at Airport for Hybrid and CNG taxis
Congestion Reduction
Better enforce Anti-idling and double-parking regulations
Expand Center City loading areas
Parking Policies
Consider the creation of demand pricing schemes
Parking for Bicycles and Motor Scooters
Set aside at least 200 feet for on-street bicycle parking and 430 for motor scooters
Develop Green Ports Plan
Implement Airport Green Plan
Increase purchase of renewable energy to 10% of total demand (from 8%)
Decrease emissions from rental car fleet
Prohibit use of airplane idling for power at gates
Use tugs to back-up aircraft at gates
TARGET 7: DIVERT 70 PERCENT OF SOLID WASTE FROM LANDFILLS
RECYCLING
Incentives for Recycling
Expand Plastics Recycling
Increase Recycling at City Facilities
Increase Oversight of Recycling in Commercial Buildings
Introduce Public Space Recycling
61
Continue Event Recycling
Expand Recycling at Transit Stations
Construction and Demolition (C&D) Waste Management Program
Electronic Recycling
Composting
Encourage household composting
Continue leaf composting in Fairmount Park
REDUCING SOLID WASTE
Saving Money and Reducing Trash (SMART) 5 Streets MOS 2010
Other Waste-Minimization Efforts
Impose a small fee on/Ban plastic bags
Ban Styrofoam containers
Anti-Littering Campaign
Use internet to harness private sector to assist in regular city cleaning efforts
Paperless Office
Process municipal payroll electronically
Place more public records, plan and documents on-line
Sustainable Procurement Policy
ENERGY-FROM-WASTE
Study Energy-from-Waste Alternatives
Include Sustainability Criteria in Solid Waste Contracts
EQUITY
TARGET 8: MANAGE STORMWATER TO MEET FEDERAL STANDARDS
GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
Maintain Recent Stormwater Regulatory Changes
Implement New Stormwater Fees
Increase the Number of Green Roofs
Require Roofs that Receive Tax Credit to be Able to Capture First Inch of Rainfall
Extend Green Roof Tax Credit to Residential Buildings
Create Building Code Guidance for Green Roofs
Install green roofs on public buildings where possible
Create Green Streets
Use Green Infrastructure Methods on City Streets
Carry out Market Street, Lancaster Avenue, Passyunk Avenue demonstration projects
Transform Vacant Land
Increase amount of green, open space (see Target 9)
Create Wetlands
Create new tidal/non-tidal wetlands along Delaware and Schuylkill Rivers
Create Urban Wetlands Registry
Restore Waterways
Restore at least one mile of creeks and streams per year
Upgrade sections of Cobbs, Mill and Tacony Creeks for recreational usage
Green Surface Parking Lots
Allow the use of pervious pavement
Change Zoning Code to require more tree screening
Expand the Rain Barrel Program
Control Pollution and Trash on the Rivers
TARGET 9: PROVIDE PARK AND RECREATION RESOURCES WITHIN 10 MINUTES OF 75 PERCENT OF
RESIDENTS
CREATE OPEN SPACE AS PART OF NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT
62
Explore the Use of Innovative Financing for Open Space Development
Prioritize New Green Space Creation Within Low-Served Neighborhoods
DEVELOP PARKLAND AND OPEN SPACE CONNECTIONS ALONG THE CITY’S CREEKS AND RIVERS
Schuykill River
Delaware River
TARGET 10: BRING LOCAL FOOD WITHIN 10 MINUTES OF 75 PERCENT OF RESIDENTS
INCREASE ACCESS TO FRESH FOOD
Expand the Number of Neighborhood Farmers’ Markets
Publicize Local Food-Source Efforts
Provide Technical Assistance
Leverage Vacant Land
Foster School-Based Efforts
CREATE DEMAND FOR LOCALLY GROWN FOOD
Foster Commercial Farming
Encourage Distribution of Healthy Food in Neighborhood Stores
Support Food Cooperative Expansion
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
Create an Urban Agriculture Workforce Strategy
Support Green Kitchen Development
COMBATING HUNGER
Integrate Anti-Hunger Efforts Into Food and Urban Agriculture Goals
TARGET 11: INCREASE TREE COVERAGE TOWARD 30 PERCENT IN ALL NEIGHBORHOODS IN 2025
STREET TREES
Change Street Tree Rules involving Property Owner Permission
Prioritize Tree Planting in Low-Canopy, High-Crime Districts
Target Empty Tree Pits
Strengthen and Increase Public-Private Maintenance Partnerships
Fully Stock Street Trees Adjacent to All City Facilities
Revise the Zoning Code Regarding Trees for Surface Parking Lots
Decrease the Cost of Tree Planting
ACCELERATE CITY-WIDE TREE PLANTING EFFORTS
Public Tree Planting Campaign
Create Urban Tree Forest Management Program
Initiate City-Based Growing
Green the Schools
Explore Tree Planting Money in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Launch Local Carbon Offset Market
ECONOMY
TARGET 12: REDUCE VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED BY 10 PERCENT
PUBLIC TRANSIT
Develop New Fare Card Technologies
Further Improve Service and Safety
Invest in Current Transit Infrastructure
Ensure Sustained Transit Funding
Plan for an Expanded Transit System
Make Transit-Oriented Development Investments
PEDESTRIAN & BIKE FRIENDLY STREETS
Upgrade Commercial Corridors
63
Develop a Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan
Build an East-West Bicycle Corridor
Develop More Off-Road Bike Trails
Explore the Creation of a Bicycle-Sharing Program
Expand the Number of Bike Racks
Create Bike Parking Stations
Design and Implement Complete Streets
Increase Traffic-Calming Measures
EXPAND CAR SHARING
Change Tax Classification for Car Share Programs
Provide On-Street Bicycle Parking Spots
Reduce Parking Ratios for Buildings with Designated Bike and Car Share Spots
TARGET 13: INCREASE THE STATE OF GOOD REPAIR IN RESILIENT INFRASTRUCTURE
Investment in Public Property Management Systems
Improve Road Maintenance and Upgrade Bridges
Acknowledge Climate Change in Infrastructure Planning
TARGET 14: DOUBLE THE NUMBER OF LOW- AND HIGH-SKILL GREEN JOBS
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Conduct a Green Jobs Market Analysis
Create a Green Economy Stakeholder Task Force
Raise Awareness about Green Jobs
Re-brand Philadelphia for Business Development Efforts
Support and Connect Energy Research and Academia
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
Fill the Need for Green Jobs
Diversify the Green Workforce
Create a Regional Green Jobs Training Center
Create a Green Jobs Corps
ENGAGEMENT
TARGET 15: PHILADELPHIA IS THE GREENEST CITY IN AMERICA
ENGAGE
Reach Out to Stakeholders
Develop Social Marketing and Public Education Campaigns
EVALUATE
Use Data to Measure Results
Publish Annual Review
Create Regularly Updated Website
64
Appendix C: PLANYC 2030: Goals and Initiatives
Table 16: PLANYC 2030: Goals, Initiatives, and Implementation Actions
LAND
Housing
Continue publicly-initiated rezoning
1 Pursue transit-oriented development
Use upcoming rezonings to direct growth toward areas with strong transit access
2 Reclaim underutilized waterfronts
Continue restoring underused or vacant waterfront land across the city
3 Increase transit options to spur development
Use transit extensions to spark growth as the subways did more than a century ago
Create new housing on public land
4 Expand co-locations with government agencies
Pursue partnerships with City and State agencies throughout the city
5 Adapt outdated buildings to new uses
Seek to adapt unused schools, hospitals, and other outdated municipal sites for productive use as new
housing
Explore additional areas of opportunity
6 Develop underused areas to knit neighborhoods together
Continue to identify underutilized areas across the city that are well-served by transit and other
infrastructure
7 Capture the potential of transportation infrastructure investments
Examine the potential of major infrastructure expansions to spur growth in new neighborhoods
8 Deck over railyards, rail lines, and highways
Explore opportunities to create new land by constructing decks over transportation infrastructure
Expand targeted affordability programs
9 Develop new financing strategies
Continue to pursue creative financing strategies to reach new income brackets
10 Expand inclusionary zoning
Seek opportunities to expand the use of inclusionary zoning, harnessing the private market to create
economically-integrated communities
11 Encourage homeownership
Continue to develop programs to encourage homeownership, emphasizing affordable apartments over
single-family homes
12 Preserve the existing stock of affordable housing throughout New York City
Continue to develop programs to preserve the existing affordable housing that so many New Yorkers
depend upon today
Open Space
Make existing sites available to more New Yorkers
1 Open schoolyards across the city as public playgrounds
Open schoolyards as playgrounds in every neighborhood
2 Increase options for competitive athletics
65
Make high-quality competition fields available to teams across the city
3 Complete underdeveloped destination parks
Fulfill the potential of at least one major undeveloped park site in every borough
Expand usable hours at existing sites
4 Provide more multi-purpose fields
Convert asphalt sites into multi-use turf fields
5 Install new lighting
Maximize time on our existing turf fields by installing additional lights for nighttime use
Re-imagine the public realm
6 Create or enhance a public plaza in every community
Create or enhance at least one public plaza in every community
7 Green the cityscape
Fill every available street tree opportunity in New York City
Expand Greenstreets program
Brownfields
Make existing Brownfield programs faster and more efficient
1 Adopt on-site testing to streamline the cleanup process
Pilot the “Triad” program on two sites
2 Create remediation guidelines for New York City cleanups
Analyze New York City‟s soil and develop a set of standard cleanup remedies appropriate for the city
3 Establish a City office to promote Brownfield planning and redevelopment
Create a new City office to increase resources dedicated to brownfield planning, testing, and cleanups
Expand enrollment into streamlined programs
4 Expand participation in the current State Brownfield Cleanup Program (BCP)
Ask State to redistribute BCP tax credits to relieve budgetary pressures, and begin covering New York
City-specific contamination
5 Create a City program to oversee all additional cleanups
Create a City-sponsored program to provide oversight of cleanups for any sites not enrolled in other
programs
6 Provide incentives to lower costs of remediation
Dedicate $15 million to capitalize a fund to support brownfield redevelopment
Encourage greater community involvement in Brownfield redevelopment
7 Encourage the State to release community-based redevelopment grants
Advocate for the State to reform the Brownfield Opportunity Area (BOA) program and release planning
grant funds to community groups
8 Provide incentives to participate in Brownfield Opportunity Area (BOA) planning
Advocate for financial incentives for developments constructed in coordination with a BOA
9 Launch outreach effort to educate communities about Brownfield redevelopment
Educate and provide technical assistance to communities, private developers, and City agencies to promote
brownfield redevelopment
Identify remaining sites for cleanups
10 Create a database of historic uses across New York City to identify potential Brownfields
Conduct a historic use assessment for all sites in order to measure long-term progress towards goals
66
11 Limit liability of property owners who seek to redevelop Brownfields
Create an insurance program and legal protections to limit the liability of developers willing to clean up
land they did not pollute
WATER
Water Quality
Continue implementing infrastructure upgrades
1 Develop and implement Long-Term Control Plans
Complete Long-Term Control Plans for all 14 New York City Watersheds, as required y law
2 Expand wet weather capacity at treatment plants
Reduce Combined Sewage Overflow (CSO) discharges by more than 185 mgd during rainstorms
Pursue proven solutions to prevent stormwater from entering the system
3 Increase use of High Level Storm Sewers (HLSS)
Convert combined sewers into HLSS and integrate HLSS into major new developments as appropriate
4 Capture the benefits of our open space plan
5 Expand the Bluebelt program
Expand Bluebelt in Staten Island and other boroughs, where possible
Expand, track, and analyze new Best Management Practices (BMPs)on a broad scale
6 Form an interagency BMP Task Force
Make the reduction of CSO volumes and other environmental issues a priority for all relevant City agencies
7 Pilot promising BMPs
Introduce 20 cubic meters of ribbed mussel beds
Plant trees with improved pit designs
Create vegetated ditches (swales) along parkways
8 Require greening of parking lots
Modify the zoning resolution to include design guidelines for off-street parking lots for commercial and
community facilities
9 Provide incentives for green roofs
Encourage the installation of green roofs through a new incentive program
10 Protect wetlands
Assess the vulnerability of existing wetlands and identify additional policies to protect and manage them
Water Networks
Ensure the quality of our drinking water
1 Continue the Watershed Protection Program
Aggressively protect our watersheds as we seek to maintain a Filtration Avoidance Determination for the
Catskill and Delaware Water Supplies
2 Construct an ultraviolet disinfection plant for the Catskill and Delaware systems
Construct an ultraviolet disinfection facility to destroy disease-causing organisms in our upstate watershed
3 Build the Croton Filtration Plant
Construct a water filtration plant to protect the Croton supply
Create redundancy for aqueducts to New York City
4 Launch a major new water conservation effort
Implement a water conservation program to reduce citywide consumption by 60 mgd
67
5 Maximize existing facilities
Expand our supply potential through increased efficiency
6 Evaluate new water sources
Evaluate 39 projects to meet the shortfall needs of the city if a prolonged shutdown of the Delaware
Aqueduct is required
Modernize in-city distribution
7 Complete Water Tunnel No. 3
Complete construction of Stage 2 and begin repairing Water Tunnel No. 1
Complete Stages 3 and 4 of Water Tunnel No. 3
8 Complete a backup tunnel to Staten Island
Replace pipelines connecting Staten Island to Water Tunnel No. 2
9 Accelerate upgrades to water main infrastructure
Increase replacement rate to over 80 miles annually
TRANSPORTATION
Transportation
Build and expand transit infrastructure
1 Increase capacity on key congested routes
Seek to fund five projects that eliminate major capacity constraints
2 Provide new commuter rail access to Manhattan
Seek to expand options for rail commuters
3 Expand transit access to underserved areas
Seek to provide transit to new and emerging neighborhoods
Improve transit service on existing infrastructure
4 Improve and expand bus service
Initiate and expand Bus Rapid Transit
Dedicate Bus/High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes on the East River bridges
Explore other improvements to bus service
5 Improve local commuter rail service
Seek to expand local use of Metro-North and Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) stations
6 Improve access to existing transit
Facilitate access to subways and bus stops citywide
7 Address congested areas around the city
Develop congestion management plans for outer-borough growth corridors
Promote other sustainable modes
8 Expand ferry service
Seek to expand service and improve integration with the city‟s existing mass transit system
9 Promote cycling
Complete the 1,800-mile bike master plan
Facilitate cycling
Improve traffic flow by reducing congestion
10 Pilot congestion pricing
Seek to use pricing to manage traffic in the Central Business District (CBD)
11 Manage roads more efficiently
68
Expand the use of Muni meters
Develop an integrated traffic management system for our regional transportation network
12 Strengthen enforcement of traffic violations
Expand the number of Traffic Enforcement Agents (TEAs)
Enable all TEAs to issue blocking-the-box tickets
Expand the use of traffic enforcement cameras
13 Facilitate freight movements
Improve access to JFK
Explore High Occupancy Truck Toll (HOTT) Lanes
Achieve a state of good repair on our roads and transit system
14 Close the Metropolitan Transportation Authority‟s state of good repair gap
Seek a grant from the SMART Authority to cover the MTA‟s funding gap
15 Reach a state of good repair on the city‟s roads and bridges
Seek a grant from the SMART Authority to fund accelerated capital repairs and upgrades
Invest in bridge and tunnel upgrades
Develop new funding sources
16 Establish a new regional transit financing authority
Seek to create a SMART Financing Authority to advance new projects and achieve a state of good repair
ENERGY
Energy
Improve energy planning
1 Establish a New York City Energy Planning Board
Work with the State and utilities to centralize planning for the city‟s supply and demand initiatives
Reduce New York City‟s energy consumption
2 Reduce energy consumption by City government
Commit 10% of the City‟s annual energy bill to fund energy-saving investments in City operations
3 Strengthen energy and building codes for New York City
Strengthen energy and building codes to support our energy efficiency strategies and other environmental
goals
4 Create an energy efficiency authority for New York City
Create the New York City Energy Efficiency Authority responsible for reaching the city‟s demand
reduction targets
5 Prioritize five key areas for targeted incentives
Use a series of mandates, challenges, and incentives to reduce demand among the city‟s largest energy
consumers
6 Expand peak load management
Expand participation in Peak Load Management Programs through smart meters
Support expansion of real-time pricing across the city
7 Launch an energy awareness and training campaign
Increase the impact of our energy efficiency efforts through a coordinated energy education, awareness, and
training campaign
Expand the city‟s clean power supply
8 Facilitate repowering and construct power plants and dedicated transmission lines
69
Facilitate the construction of 2,000 to 3,000 MW of supply capacity by repowering old plants, constructing
new ones, and building dedicated transmission lines
9 Expand Clean Distributed Generation (“Clean DG”)
Increase the amount of Clean DG by 800 MW
Promote opportunities to develop district energy at appropriate sites in New York City
10 Support expansion of natural gas infrastructure
Support critical expansions to the city‟s natural gas infrastructure
11 Foster the market for renewable energy
Create a property tax abatement for solar panel installations
Study the cost-effectiveness of solar electricity when evaluated on a Real Time Pricing scenario
Support the construction of the city‟s first carbon-neutral building, primarily powered by solar electricity
Increase use of solar energy in City buildings through creative financing
Work with the State to eliminate barriers to increasing the use of solar energy in the city
Pilot one or more technologies for producing energy from solid waste
End methane emissions from sewage treatment plants and expand the use of digester gas
Study the expansion of gas capture and energy production from existing landfills
Modernize electricity delivery infrastructure
12 Accelerate reliability improvements to the city‟s grid
Advocate for Con Edison to implement recommendations from the City‟s report on the western Queens
power outages
13 Facilitate grid repairs through improved coordination and joint bidding
Pursue the passage of joint bidding legislation
Ensure adequate pier facilities are available to Con Edison to offload transformers and other equipment
14 Support Con Edison‟s efforts to modernize the grid
Support Con Edison‟s 3G System of the Future initiative
AIR QUALITY
Air
Reduce road vehicle emissions
1 Capture the air quality benefits of our transportation plan
2 Improve fuel efficiency of private cars
Waive New York City‟s sales tax on the cleanest, most efficient vehicles
Work with the MTA, the Port Authority, and the State Department of Transportation to promote hybrid and
other clean vehicles
Pilot new technologies and fuels, including hydrogen and plug-in hybrid vehicles
3 Reduce emissions from taxis, black cars, and for-hire vehicles
Reduce taxi and limousine idling
Work with the Taxi and Limousine Commission (TLC) and the taxicab industry to double the taxi fleet‟s
efficiency
Work with stakeholders to double the fuel efficiency of black cars and for-hire vehicles
4 Replace, retrofit, and refuel diesel trucks
Introduce biodiesel into the City‟s truck fleet, go beyond compliance with local laws, and further reduce
emissions
Accelerate emissions reductions of private fleets through existing CMAQ programs
70
Work with stakeholders and the State to create incentives for the adoption of vehicle emission control and
efficiency strategies
Improve compliance of existing anti-idling laws through a targeted educational campaign
5 Decrease school bus emissions
Retrofit both large and small school buses and reduce their required retirement age
Reduce other transportation emissions
6 Retrofit ferries and promote use of cleaner fuels
Retrofit the Staten Island Ferry fleet to reduce emissions
Work with private ferries to reduce their emissions
7 Seek to partner with the Port Authority to reduce emissions from Port facilities
Seek to work with the Port Authority to reduce emissions from the Port‟s marine vehicles, port facilities,
and airports
8 Reduce emissions from construction vehicles
Accelerate adoption of technologies to reduce construction-related emissions
Reduce emissions from buildings
9 Capture the air quality benefits of our energy plan
10 Promote the use of cleaner burning heating fuels
Lower the maximum sulfur content in heating fuel from 2000 ppm to 500 ppm
Reduce emissions from boilers in 100 city public schools
Pursue natural solutions to improve air quality
11 Capture the benefits of our open space plan
12 Reforest targeted areas of our parkland
Reforest 2,000 acres of parkland
13 Increase tree plantings on lots
Partner with stakeholders to help plant one million trees by 2017
Understand the scope of the challenge
14 Launch collaborative local air quality study
Monitor and model neighborhood-level air quality across New York City
CLIMATE CHANGE
Climate Change
Protect our vital infrastructure
1 Create an intergovernmental Task Force to protect our vital infrastructure
Expand our adaptation strategies beyond the protection of our water supply, sewer, and wastewater
treatment systems to include all essential city infrastructure
Develop site-specific strategies
2 Work with vulnerable neighborhoods to develop site-specific strategies
Create a community planning process to engage all stakeholders in community-specific climate adaptation
strategies
Incorporate climate change concerns into planning process
3 Launch a citywide strategic planning process for climate change adaptation
Create a strategic planning process to adapt to climate change impacts
Ensure that New York‟s 100-year floodplain maps are updated
Document the City‟s floodplain management strategies to secure discounted flood insurance for New
Yorkers
Amend the building code to address the impacts of climate change
71
Bibliography
A City-wide Plan of Land Use. City of Wilmington. 25 Aug. 2009
Berke, Philip, and David Godschalk. "Searchng for the Good Plan: A Meta-Analysis of Plan
Quality Studies." Journal of Planning Literature 23.3 (2009): 227-40. SAGE Journals Online.
Web. 16 Dec. 2009. <http://jpl.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/23/3/227>.
Berke, Philip R. "Does Sustainable Development Offer a New Direction for Planning?
Challenges for the Twenty-First Century." Journal of Planning Literature 17.1 (2002): 21-36.
SAGE Journals Online. Web. 19 Oct. 2009.
<http://jpl.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/17/1/21>.
Berke, Philip R., and Maria M. Conroy. "Are We Planning for Sustainable Development? An
Evaluation of 30 Comprehensive Plans." Journal of the American Planning Association 66.1
(2000): 21-33. Informaworld. Web. 19 Oct. 2009.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01944360008976081>.
Campbell, Scott. "Green Cities, Growing Cities, Just Cities?: Urban Planning and the
Contradictions of Sustainable Development." Journal of the American Planning Association
63.3 (1996): 296-312. Informaworld. Web. 24 Sept. 2009.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01944369608975696>.
Chifos, Carla. "The Sustainable Communities Experiment in the United States: Insights from
Three Federal-Level Initiatives." Journal of Planning Education and Research 26.4 (2007):
435-49. SAGE Journals Online. Web. 20 Oct. 2009.
<http://jpe.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/26/4/435>.
Climate Sustainability Plan City of Wilmington, 13 Apr. 2009. Web. 23 Nov. 2009.
<http://www.wilmingtonde.gov/greencity/index.htm>.
Conroy, Maria M., and Timothy Beatly. "Getting It Done: An Exploration of US Sustainability
Efforts in Practice." Planning, Practice & Research 22.1 (2007): 25-40. Print.
Conroy, Maria M. "Moving the Middle Ahead: Challenges and Opportunities of Sustainability
in Indiana, Kentucky, and Ohio." Journal of Planning Education and Research 26.1 (2006):
18-27. SAGE Journals Online. Web. 23 Nov. 2009.
<http://jpe.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/26/1/18>.
Conroy, Maria M., and Philip R. Berke. "What makes a good sustainable development plan?
An analysis of factors that influence principles of sustainable development." Environment
and Planning A 36.8 (2004): 1381-96. Web. 19 Nov. 2009.
CPC Memorandum: Resolution 10-09. City of Wilmington. 2009
72
Department of Planning Memorandum: RE: Resolution 10-09. City of Wilmington. 16 Jun. 2009
Godschalk, David R. "Longer View: Land Use Planning Challenges: Coping with Conflicts in
Visions of Sustainable Development and Livable Communities." Journal of the American
Planning Association 70.1 (2004): 4-13. Informaworld. Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01944360408976334>.
"Greenworks Philadelphia." PDF file of Greenworks Philadelphia. Mayor's Office of
Sustainability, 14 Aug. 2009. Web. 23 Nov. 2009.
<http://www.phila.gov/green/greenworks/PDFs/Greenworks_OnlinePDF_FINAL.pdf>.
Jepson Jr., Edward J. "The Adoption of Sustainable Development Policies and Techniques in
U.S. Cities: How Wide, How Deep, and What Role for Planners?" Journal of Planning
Education and Research 23.3 (2004): 229-41. SAGE Journals Online. Web. 19 Nov. 2009.
<http://jpe.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/23/3/229>.
Krizek, Kevin J., and Joe Power. A Planners Guide to Sustainable Development. First ed.
Chicago: American Planning Association, 1996. Print.
Mayor Baker Sets Forth Proactive Stance to Enable Wilmington to Combat Serious
Environmental Concerns. (2008, August 19) City News Room. Retrieved November 23,
2009, from http://www.wilmingtonde.gov/newsroom/2008/0819_climate_change.pdf.
Mayor Bloomberg Announces Creation Of Office Of Long-Term Planning And Sustainability.
(n.d.). News from the Blue Room. Retrieved November 23, 2009, from www.nyc.gov/cgibin/misc/pfprinter.cgi?action=print&sitename=OM&p=1260913680000
Mayor John F. Street Announces City’s Local Action Plan for Climate Change, Highlighting
Philadelphia’s Commitment to a Sustainable Environment. (n.d.). PHILA.GOV | City @ your
service:. Retrieved November 23, 2009, from
https://ework.phila.gov/philagov/news/prelease.asp?id=310
Mayor Nutter Unveils Plan For Making Philadelphia America’s Number One Green City.
(2009, April 29). PHILA.GOV | City @ your service:. Retrieved November 23, 2009, from
https://ework.phila.gov/philagov/news/prelease.asp?id=544
Mayors Climate Protection Center. (n.d.). The United States Conference of Mayors usmayors.org. Retrieved December 15, 2009, from
<http://www.usmayors.org/climateprotection/revised>
“Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary." Dictionary and Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online.
N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2009. <http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/Greenwashing>.
73
New York City's Transformation to a Green Economy. City of New York, 20 Oct. 2009. Web.
23 Nov. 2009.
<http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/downloads/pdf/nyc_green_economy_plan.pdf>.
NYC.gov. City of New York, 12 Dec. 2009. Web. 23 Nov. 2009. <http://nyc.gov/>.
PLANYC 2030. City of New York, 5 June 2007. Web. 23 Nov. 2009.
<http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/downloads/pdf/full_report.pdf>.
PLANYC 2030. City of New York, 12 Dec. 2009. Web. 23 Nov. 2009.
<http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/home/home.shtml>.
Philadelphia Going Green. (n.d.). PHILA.GOV | Welcome to the City of Philadelphia. Retrieved
November 23, 2009, from http://www.phila.gov/green/mos.html
Philadelphia Releases Local Climate Action Plan, Building on City’s Commitments — ICLEI
Local Governments for Sustainability USA. (n.d.). Local Action Moves the World — ICLEI
Local Governments for Sustainability USA. Retrieved December 15, 2009, from
http://www.icleiusa.org/news-events/press-room/press-releases/philadelphia-releaseslocal-climate-action-plan-building-on-city2019s-commitments
Phila.gov | Mayor's Office of Sustainability | Greenworks Philadelphia: City of Philadelphia, 24
Aug. 2009. Web. 24 Nov. 2009. <http://www.phila.gov/green/greenworks/index.html>.
PHILA.GOV | Welcome to the City of Philadelphia: City of Philadelphia, 11 Dec. 2009. Web. 25
Nov. 2009. <http://www.phila.gov/>.
Portney, Kent E. Taking Sustainable Cities Seriously: Economic Development, the Environment,
and Quality of Life in American Cities. First ed. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2003. Print.
Saha, Devashree. "Empirical research on local government sustainability efforts in the USA:
gaps in the current literature." Local Environment 14.1 (2009): 17-30. Informaworld. Web.
23 Nov. 2009.
Saha, Devashree, and Robert G. Paterson. "Local Government Efforts to Promote the "Three
Es" of Sustainable Development: Survey in Medium to Large Cities in the United States."
Journal of Planning Education and Research 28.1 (2008): 21-37. SAGE Journals Online. Web.
20 Oct. 2009. <http://jpe.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/28/1/21>.
"Team Charter – Economic Development Energy and Sustainability: 2009 – 2014 Action
Plan ." EnergySubcommittee.pdf . City of Philadelphia, 4 Mar. 2009. Web. 23 Nov. 2009.
<http://beta.phila.gov/philagov/strongLeadership/reformAgenda/PDFs/EnergySubcommi
ttee.pdf>
The Agreement - Mayors Climate Protection Center. (n.d.). The United States Conference of
Mayors - usmayors.org. Retrieved December 15, 2009, from
74
http://usmayors.org/climateprotection/agreement.htm
The Climate Registry. (n.d.). The Climate Registry. Retrieved December 15, 2009, from
http://www.theclimateregistry.org/
Welcome to Wilmington, Delaware City of Wilmington, 10 Dec. 2009. Web. 23 Nov. 2009.
<http://www.wilmingtonde.gov/>.
Wheeler, Stephen M. "Planning for Metropolitan Sustainability." Journal of Planning
Education and Research 20.2 (2000): 133-45. SAGE Journals Online. Web. 19 Oct. 2009.
<http://jpl.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/20/2/133>.
WCED. Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and
Development. Vol. 1. London: Oxford University Press, 1987. Web. 12 Dec. 2009.
<http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm>.
"Wilmington's Climate Sustainability Plan EXECUTIVE ORDER 2008-4." Climate
Sustainability Plan City of Wilmington, 13 Apr. 2009. Web. 23 Nov. 2009.
<http://www.wilmingtonde.gov/greencity/executiveorder.htm>.
75